Faith, Works, Baptism, and Obedience

Many believe that since the Bible teaches justification by faith (Rom. 5:1) and not by works (Eph. 2:8-9; Titus 3:5), baptism is excluded as an act essential to salvation, despite many passages that teach just the opposite (Acts 2:38; 22:16; 1 Peter 3:21; Titus 3:5; Eph. 5:26; 1 Cor. 12:13 paired with Eph. 5:23 [baptized into one body, Christ the Savior of the body]; John 3:5; Gal. 3:26-27; etc.). It is the burden of this article to show the fallacy of this belief.

In the first place, the Bible teaches that baptism is not a work of righteousness which we have done. Just the opposite is stated in Titus 3:5: “Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, through the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Spirit” (NKJV). The washing of regeneration is a reference to baptism and is excluded by Paul as being a work of righteousness which we have done that saves us apart from God’s mercy. What is baptism, then? It is a part of God’s means of extending his mercy to mankind. Baptism is God showing us kindness. It is God, through grace, giving us a means to be saved by his mercy.

Water baptism amounts to nothing; it is worthless without God behind it in his compassion for us. When Naaman dipped seven times in the Jordan River for his cleansing from leprosy (2 Kings 5), it would not have made an ounce of difference without God being behind the command with the extension of his grace. The water did not cleanse Naaman; God did. But Naaman was not going to be cleansed without dipping in the Jordan those seven times, without obeying the command to do so. Why can’t we see the parallel with baptism in our day?

One acquainted with the New Testament cannot read Titus 3:5 without being reminded of John 3:5: “Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God” (NKJV). Paul, in Titus, is saying what Jesus said in John. To be saved in Titus is to enter the kingdom of God in John. To be saved is to be in the kingdom of God, where the saved are.

Indeed, Paul teaches justification by faith. “The just shall live by faith” (Rom. 1:17 NKJV). “Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith apart from the deeds of the law” (Rom. 3:28 NKJV). “Therefore, having been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom also we have access by faith into this grace in which we stand, and rejoice in hope of the glory of God” (Rom. 5:1-2 NKJV).

One cannot enter the waters of baptism without faith in what God said about doing so and expect the cleansing of sin. If I do not believe what God said about it, I have not acted in faith and cannot be justified by faith.

In the book of Romans, from which I have just quoted, Paul is writing to a mixed audience of Jews and Greeks. The Jews came to Christianity out of the background of Judaism and the Law of Moses. Much of what Paul writes in Romans is directed to the Jews, whose inclination through much of the first century was to try to hang on to both the Law of Moses and to Christ at the same time. The Law of Moses was a law system, not a faith system. What was the problem with the Law of Moses, a works system of salvation?

Paul tells us, “For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse; for it is written, ‘Cursed is everyone who does not continue in all things which are written in the book of the law, to do them’” (Gal. 3:10 NKJV). James says, “Whoever shall keep the whole law, and yet stumble in one point, he is guilty of all” (James 2:10 NKJV). This is the problem not just with the Law of Moses but with any and all law systems God might give man. As soon as a man violates one law, justice demands satisfaction—punishment—“the law brings about wrath; for where there is no law there is no transgression” (Rom. 4:15 NKJV). To violate a law of God, any law he gives, is unrighteousness; it is sin. “Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law” (1 John 3:4 KJV).

Jesus was the only sinless man ever to live. Law condemns all of us, for we have all broken God’s law. “All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God” (Rom. 3:23 NKJV). Thus, “by the works of the law no flesh shall be justified” (Gal. 2:16c NKJV). The word “the” in Gal. 2:16, just quoted, is not found in the original but was added by the translators in both instances. When translated without the additions, it reads as follows: “By works of law no flesh shall be justified.” If you check an interlinear, you will find this to be true. What is the point?

The point is that while it is true Paul had specific reference to the Law of Moses because that is the law his audience had in mind, he phrases his statement in such a way as to include all law. No one will ever get to heaven by perfect keeping of works of law. Paul says the same thing in Rom. 3:28, where again the word “the” has been added by translators and is not in the original. It thus should read as follows: “Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith apart from the deeds of (‘the’ omitted here is not in the original manuscripts—DS) law” (NKJV). Deeds are works.

A question thus arises: If I am not saved by works of law, why be concerned with obedience? Paul knew this was what some would conclude, and he begins to address that issue in Rom. 6:1, where he says, “What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin that grace may abound?” (NKJV). Remember, it is “by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God” (Eph. 2:8 NKJV).

Paul never meant to imply that obedience was optional. Paul responds vigorously, saying, “God forbid” (ASV, KJV), “By no means!” (ESV), “May it never be” (NAS), “Certainly not!” (NKJV). He says, “How shall we who died to sin live any longer in it?” (Rom. 6:2 NKJV).

He then says, “Do you not know,” introducing the subject of baptism, “that as many of us as were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? Therefore we were buried with him through baptism into death” (Rom. 6:3-4 NKJV). Whose death? Into Christ’s death. But watch it closely, for up pops verse 8: “Now if we died with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with him” (NKJV). So we are baptized into Christ’s death, but that is also the place where “we died with Christ.” When we arise from this death, we “should walk in newness of life” (Rom. 6:4 NKJV), for we have been granted a new spiritual life and we should “present yourselves to God as being alive from the dead” (Rom. 6:13 NKJV). We have been “set free from sin” (Rom. 6:18 NKJV), but when? When we died to it, “For he who has died has been freed from sin” (Rom. 6:7 NKJV; see also Rom. 6:2). When did we die? In baptism (Rom. 6:4). Thus, no baptism, then no death; no death, then no being freed from sin.

Now who is Paul talking to? To Christians who have been justified by faith, not by works. Did Paul consider baptism to be a work of the kind of which he had been talking, by which a man could not be saved? Not at all! How, then, did he consider it? As a part of being justified by faith.

Paul begins the book of Romans with this statement in chapter 1, verse 5, saying he had been given grace and apostleship “to bring about the obedience of faith among all the Gentiles, for his name’s sake” (NAS). The NKJV says, “among all nations for his name” instead of “all the Gentiles.” But what was the objective? Obedience of faith! Why? Because without obedience, faith is dead and cannot save anyone, and that is from the get-go, from the very beginning. “Faith without works is dead” (James 2:26 NKJV).

When Peter stands up on the Day of Pentecost and preaches the first gospel sermon ever, creates by his preaching faith in those who hear, and then tells them what to do in response to their question asking what they can do, he responds by saying, “Repent, and let every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins” (Acts 2:38 NKJV). You cannot tell me they were justified by faith if their response was, “I don’t think so right now, maybe later.” Nor can you tell me they were justified by faith if they failed to believe the word of God that baptism was for the remission of sins, just as Peter, speaking by the Holy Spirit, said, for that would not be belief but unbelief or disbelief. It would be the same as calling God a liar.

Paul closes the book of Romans the same way he opened it: “has been made known to all the nations, leading to obedience of faith” (Rom. 16:26 NAS). “Obedience of faith” is obedience led by faith, or obedience because of faith, or obedience out of faith. What does that mean, then? Faith must precede obedience. The justifying faith Paul was talking about in the book of Romans was a faith that led to obedience. Faith must precede obedience before you can have obedience out of faith.

There has never been a baptism acceptable to God but what it was first preceded by faith and submitted to by faith. This in itself invalidates infant baptism, as the infant is incapable of having faith. Faith saves because it believes God and does not doubt; therefore, it acts. Without obedience (acts, works, call it what you will), faith never really lives and is dead from the beginning and thus never saved the man at any point in time. If dead faith saved, the demons would be saved, for James says they believe (James 2:19). The same could be said of those rulers who believed in Jesus but did not confess him because they loved the praise of men more than the praise of God (John 12:42-43).

Baptism is the dividing line between living faith and dead faith. Why? Is it because I said so? No! It is because Paul said when we arise from baptism that we “should walk in newness of life” (Rom. 6:4 NKJV). We are baptized into Christ (Gal. 3:27 NKJV). In Christ we are a new creation (2 Cor. 5:17 NKJV). The old man died in baptism, and we arise a new creation. If we are saved before baptism (a baptism growing out of faith), the question ought to be asked, who is it that dies in baptism? Is it a saved man? Paul teaches that we die in baptism in the Romans 6:2-8 passage, but why would you want to put a saved man to death? Why kill a saved man? That is the position they put themselves in who believe we are saved by faith before baptism. This is a question that needs an answer.

I want to remind the reader once again of what Paul said of baptism in Titus 3:5: “not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, through the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Spirit” (NKJV). God gave us baptism (the washing of regeneration) as a part of his saving mercy toward us, not as a work of righteousness which we have done that works our way to heaven.

Baptism puts us into Christ, where salvation is. Paul says in this very book of Romans, where he promotes the doctrine of justification by faith, that there is “no condemnation to those who are in Christ Jesus” (Rom. 8:1 NKJV). In the same book he tells us how we got into Christ Jesus, where there is no condemnation. He says, “Do you not know that as many of us as were baptized into Christ Jesus …” (Rom. 6:3 NKJV).

This idea of separating faith from baptism is all man’s doing. You’ll not find it in the Bible. Paul says in the Galatian letter, “For you are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus. For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ” (Gal. 3:26-27 NKJV). How do you get into Christ? Paul tells us a second time in this passage, that is, if we did not get it the first time in the Roman passage just quoted in the prior paragraph. But Paul tells us more. What?

He tells us you cannot separate faith from baptism unless you do it on your own initiative. The word “for,” beginning in verse 27 of Galatians 3, ties it to verse 26. You cannot separate the two sentences. There is more.

Can one put on Christ without baptism? Those who say you can ought to provide the passage that tells us that. According to this Galatian passage, it is done by baptism. I have never found another passage anywhere that has given an alternative.

Paul says those who are sons of God were baptized and thereby put on Christ. There is a law of exclusion in play here. If you were not baptized, you did not put on Christ in baptism and are therefore excluded from being a son of God.

To summarize, “the just shall live by faith” (Rom. 1:17; Gal. 3:11; Heb. 10:38 NKJV), but it is such a faith that, when it hears, it believes and obeys and is not indifferent to obedience. It is thus a living faith. It does not fear that obedience is working your way to heaven. Neither Peter nor Paul nor any other New Testament writer ever feared that obedience would be looked upon by God as an attempt to work your way to heaven. Baptism is God’s extension of grace to us, his means of cleansing us, chosen by him, not us, and not a part of works of righteousness that we have done that merit salvation.

[To download this article or print it out click here.]

In Christ or Out of Christ

The phrase “in Christ” is of vast importance in New Testament teaching. One must be “in Christ” to be saved. The phrase itself is found 87 times in the New King James Version of the New Testament and 91 times in the English Standard Version, so we run across the phrase frequently in our Bibles. Well, what does the phrase mean? It depends on the context.

Context always matters in determining the meaning of words and phrases. It is no different with this phrase. For example, in Acts 24:24, Felix “sent for Paul and heard him concerning the faith in Christ.” (NKJV) In this passage Christ is the object of faith, thus this is only a reference to the person of Christ versus some other man.

By contrast, you run into a passage like 1 Cor. 15:17-18, which reads, “And if Christ is not risen, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins! Then also those who have fallen asleep in Christ have perished.” (NKJV) In this passage “in Christ” clearly has reference to a location in the spiritual realm.

We are concerned with the phrase “in Christ” in this article only where the phrase is used in reference to a spiritual location. In the physical realm each body is separate from another body; we each have our own. In the spiritual realm we are to become one body with Christ. We enter into Christ. We are “baptized into Christ” and, having done so, “have put on Christ.” (Gal. 3:27 NKJV) “For by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body.” (1 Cor. 12:13 NKJV) Christ’s spiritual body is the church (Eph. 1:22-23, Col. 1:18).

One cannot overemphasize the importance of being “in Christ,” in being a reference to location. Wherever I am, it automatically excludes me from being anywhere else. I cannot be physically present in your house and in someone else’s house at the same time. In Christianity, in the spiritual realm, one is either “in Christ” or outside him. There are no other possible alternatives.

To be in Christ means:

·  Forgiveness. The apostle Paul, writing to the Colossians, says, “He has delivered us from the power of darkness and translated us into the kingdom of the Son of His love, in whom we have redemption through His blood, the forgiveness of sins.” (Col. 1:13-14 NKJV) In whom? The text makes it clear: in Christ. Yes, we are saved through Christ, through what he did on the cross, but we are saved in Christ, by being placed in his body through gospel obedience.

“All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.” (Rom. 3:23 NKJV) “There is none righteous, no, not one.” (Rom. 3:10 NKJV) If you desire forgiveness of your sins you must be “in Christ.” “Nor is there salvation in any other, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved.” (Acts 4:12 NKJV) Forgiveness is in Christ, not outside of him.

·   Redemption. Paul, in Romans 3:24, speaks of “the redemption that is in Christ Jesus.” (NKJV) We are redeemed from sin and its consequences. “In him we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins.” (Eph. 1:7 NKJV) Jesus purchased us with his blood, the price for the forgiveness of our sins. “You were bought at a price.” (1 Cor. 6:20 NKJV) Peter tells us the price: “You were not redeemed with corruptible things, like silver or gold … but with the precious blood of Christ.” (1 Peter 1:18-19 NKJV) Things are redeemed at a cost. Redemption is “in Christ,” not outside him. How do I know? The Bible tells me so, Rom. 3:24.

·   Salvation. In 2 Tim. 2:10, Paul speaks of “the salvation which is in Christ Jesus with eternal glory.” (NKJV) Isn’t that the thing we all long for? It is found “in Christ,” not outside him.

·   Promise of Life. Paul speaks of “the promise of life which is in Christ Jesus.” (2 Tim. 1:1 NKJV) Even if death were simply a state of unconsciousness, which it is not, do we not all desire life? The promise of life is in Jesus, not outside him.

·   Eternal Life. “The gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.” (Rom. 6:23 NKJV) In Christ, there need be no more fear of death, or of sickness, or illness, or of separation. “And God shall wipe away every tear from their eyes; there shall be no more death, nor sorrow, nor crying; and there shall be no more pain, for the former things have passed away.” (Rev. 21:4 NKJV) But this is “in Christ,” not outside him.

·   No Condemnation. “There is therefore now no condemnation to those who are in Christ Jesus, who do not walk according to the flesh, but according to the Spirit.” (Rom. 8:1 NKJV) It is a wonderful thing not to have to carry around the burden of sin, but this is only “in Christ,” not outside of him. We are not condemned “in Christ.” Outside Christ is a different matter.

·   Alive to God. We are “alive to God in Christ Jesus our Lord.” (Rom. 6:11 NKJV) Man cannot come to God in any way other than through Christ. Jesus’ own words were, “No one comes to the Father except through me.” (John 14:6 NKJV) “In Christ” we are alive to God. Outside Christ, we are dead to God. You cannot live for God outside Christ.

·   A New Creation. “Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; old things have passed away; behold, all things have become new.” (2 Cor. 5:17 NKJV) “New creation” is “new creature” in the New American Standard translation. Do you want a new start in life? Do you need one? It is only found “in Christ.” A new life, a new beginning, is found “in Christ,” not outside him.

·   The Love of God. In Rom. 8:38-39, Paul tells Christians there is no outside power that “shall be able to separate us from the love of God which is in Christ Jesus our Lord.” (NKJV) Yes, sin separates us from God (Isa. 59:2), but in Christ those sins are forgiven. God loves us even as sinners (John 3:16, Rom. 5:8), but in Christ the floodgates of God’s love are wide open toward us. You can rest assured of God’s love for you “in Christ.”

·   God’s kindness. “That in the ages to come He might show the exceeding riches of His grace in His kindness toward us in Christ Jesus.” (Eph. 2:7 NKJV) God’s kindness comes to us “in Christ,” not outside of him.

·   Sanctification. Paul, in writing to the church at Corinth, begins his letter “to the church of God which is at Corinth, to those who are sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be saints, with all who in every place call on the name of Jesus Christ our Lord.” (1 Cor. 1:2 NKJV) We are sanctified in Christ, which means we are made holy. We become consecrated to God in Christ. One cannot be made holy outside Christ. Holiness is found “in Christ,” not outside Christ.

·   Grace. Do you want to be saved by grace? It is the only way any of us can be saved. If so, grace is found “in Christ,” not outside him. “You therefore, my son, be strong in the grace that is in Christ Jesus.” (2 Tim. 2:1 NKJV) If grace is found there, that is where you and I need to be, “in Christ.” If you were told where riches were found for the taking, the wise individual would go to that location.

·   Every spiritual blessing. “Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places in Christ.” (Eph. 1:3 NKJV) Spiritual blessings are found “in Christ,” not outside him. What are these blessings? That is the very thing we are discussing in this article, incomplete as it is.

·   The righteousness of God. “For he has made him who knew no sin to be sin for us, that we might become the righteousness of God in him.” (2 Cor. 5:21 NKJV) “In him” is clearly a reference to Jesus. In Jesus we find our righteousness, “in Christ,” not outside Christ.

Surely any open-minded person who believes the Bible to be the word of God can see the absolute necessity of being “in Christ” for salvation and to obtain the many blessings associated with being “in Christ.” Thus, the only question remaining is how one enters into Christ? Although this was discussed earlier, let us go over it again. The Bible plainly tells us how we enter into Christ. “Or do you not know that as many of us as were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death?” (Rom. 6:3 NKJV) “For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.” (Gal. 3:27 NKJV)

No, baptism will not bring you into Christ without faith and repentance, but baptism is the final step one takes to enter into Christ. How do I know? The Bible just told me so in the passages just quoted.

Few in Christendom believe baptism is essential. They think they can get “in Christ” some other way, although the passage that teaches that way has never been provided. We, as human beings, are heavily influenced by what the majority thinks. If your own thinking contradicts the thought of the majority, it seems natural to question yourself. How can I be right and everyone else be wrong? In addition to that, there are negative consequences for bucking the consensus of thought. There is pressure to conform. Who wants to be ostracized? Who wants to alienate friends and family? It is easy to tell yourself baptism does not matter because that seems to be what the majority of Christendom has concluded.

However, I am reminded that Peter and the apostles said, “We ought to obey God rather than men.” (Acts 5:29 NKJV) They were speaking for themselves, but no doubt the same principle applies to us as well. One is also reminded of Paul’s statement to the Galatians, “Do I seek to please men? For if I still pleased men, I would not be a servant of Christ.” (Gal. 1:10 NKJV)

To be “in Christ” or to be out of Christ, that is the decision all persons of accountable age must make. I will close this with words from an old hymn often sung: “trust and obey, for there’s no other way to be happy in Jesus, but to trust and obey.” If you have not obeyed Jesus in baptism it is past time. Today is the day of salvation. Today is the day to enter Christ.

[To download this article or print it out click here].

 

Paul, Baptism, And The Twelve At Ephesus

A few preliminary comments are in order before entering into the topic of our article.

Many people believe baptism is unrelated to salvation, that it is not necessary to become a Christian, and that one can be saved without it. Often Paul is cited from the passage in 1 Corinthians 1:14–17, where he says he is thankful he baptized none of the Corinthians except Crispus, Gaius, and the household of Stephanas, and goes on to say, “Christ did not send me to baptize” (v. 17). Christ sent him “to preach the gospel” (1 Cor. 1:17, CSB). Many take this to mean Paul did not believe baptism was essential to salvation. We need to look a bit further.

Paul established the church in Corinth in Acts 18 by preaching the gospel there. He was there a year and a half (Acts 18:11). It seems many have overlooked what happened as a result of Paul's preaching in Corinth. The text says, “Many of the Corinthians, when they heard, believed and were baptized” (Acts 18:8, CSB). If Paul did not include baptism as a part of the gospel he preached, how did they come to know about it? Why were they baptized if it was not a part of the gospel?

Does it matter that Paul left the actual baptizing to his associates rather than personally doing it himself? Paul does not say, “I am glad none of you were baptized.” He only says his charge was to preach the gospel. His helpers could do the work of baptizing (Silas and Timothy were with Paul in Corinth; Acts 18:5). The validity of one's baptism is not dependent on who does the immersing.

If Peter preached the gospel in Acts 2 on the Day of Pentecost, and there is only one gospel, then Paul preached what Peter preached, and that included baptism. Remember Peter's words when he preached the first gospel sermon ever on the Day of Pentecost in Acts 2:38: “Repent and be baptized, each of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit” (CSB). If men could only be led to believe what Peter preached that day, what mankind calls Christendom would look vastly different than it does.

All the Corinthians who obeyed the gospel were baptized. In writing to them later, Paul says, “For we were all baptized by one Spirit into one body” (1 Cor. 12:13, CSB). Note that he says “all.” The Holy Spirit, preaching through inspired men, Paul being one of them, taught baptism and led men to it. That baptism was into the body of Christ, into salvation, into His church. Paul tells us where baptism puts us: “For those of you who were baptized into Christ have been clothed with Christ” (Gal. 3:27, CSB). Salvation is found in Christ, not outside Him. Baptism puts one into Christ (Rom. 6:3; Gal. 3:27).

I have said these things by way of introduction to the topic of this article, the events surrounding the twelve disciples Paul found in Ephesus. These events transpired quite a while after Paul left Corinth, for Paul did some extensive traveling after Corinth (see Acts 18:18–23). On those travels, he did stop briefly in Ephesus after leaving Corinth (Acts 18:19–21), but was not there long before moving on. The events with the twelve at Ephesus happened at a later date, on a return to Ephesus, at which time he was there for three years (Acts 20:31).

Between Paul's first brief stop in Ephesus and his return, Apollos had been there and taught, knowing only John's baptism. The events surrounding the twelve Paul found there seem to have happened upon his arrival at the beginning of the three years he spent there.

The question that arises concerning these twelve men, whom the Bible calls “disciples,” is why they were baptized again—a second time. It might be well to discuss the meaning of the word disciple. Most of the time, when one reads the word disciple in the New Testament, it refers to one who is a Christian. Certainly, a Christian is a disciple, a disciple of Christ, but the words Christian and disciple are not synonyms. The word disciple means “a learner”; it is a person who follows the teaching of another, an adherent of another. One could be a disciple of the Pharisees, of John the Baptist, of Christ, etc.

When Paul arrived in Ephesus in Acts 19, the text says he found some disciples. It is implied, correctly and with little doubt, that they were disciples of Christ. However, one can only be a disciple as far as the knowledge of his subject will allow him to be. You can only follow, as a disciple, to the limits of your understanding. The twelve men at Ephesus, obviously, had heard enough about Christ to want to follow Him, but they had not yet heard of baptism into Christ (Matt. 28:19). They were followers of Christ as far as their knowledge would take them. That does not mean they were Christians—not yet. If they were already Christians, why was Paul bothering them?

The next thing that needs consideration is what Paul meant when he asked them if they had received the Holy Spirit when they believed. Paul clearly meant the miraculous gift of the Holy Spirit that gifted the recipient with miraculous abilities. There is a listing of these abilities, or gifts, found in 1 Corinthians 12:4–11. We know he was asking about that measure of the Holy Spirit because there was no reason to ask a Christian, whom he assumed they were, if they had received the normal measure of the Holy Spirit, for that is granted to all Christians.

This promise to the Christian of the Holy Spirit is first made in Acts 2:38, but we read of it elsewhere as well: “Peter replied, ‘Repent and be baptized, each of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit’” (CSB). “In Him you also—when you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation, and when you also believed—were sealed in Him with the promised Holy Spirit” (Eph. 1:13, CSB). “Don't you yourselves know that you are God's temple and that the Spirit of God lives in you?” (1 Cor. 3:16, CSB). Other passages proving the point could be listed.

So we know that Paul wanted to know if these Christians, as he supposed they were, had received the miraculous gift of the Spirit. When they replied that they had not even heard of the Holy Spirit, he knew something was seriously wrong. How can one be baptized into Christ, thus made a Christian, and not even hear of the Holy Spirit? The baptism Jesus proclaimed that puts one into the body of Christ (Gal. 3:27), the baptism of the Great Commission, is “in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit” (Matt. 28:19, CSB). The word “in” in this passage should be “into”; see the side-margin note in the NAS 1963 Bible. The Greek word "eis" used here means into, signaling a change of relationship. If these men had been baptized correctly, they would certainly have heard of the Holy Spirit. In addition, they would have heard of the promised Holy Spirit given to all who are baptized into Christ.

This brings up a serious question: What must one know to be baptized correctly? That is an issue that has been debated through the years. Must one know it is for the remission of sins (Acts 2:38), that it puts one into Christ's church (1 Cor. 12:13—the body being the church; Eph. 1:22–23), or is it sufficient to know only that God commands it and therefore it ought to be done, while being ignorant of its ramifications? One must know what he or she is doing when baptized to be baptized correctly, but to say how much one must know, I would not want to say. I have strong ideas about it, but I reserve them. I could be wrong in my thinking. However, I am informed enough from this account of the twelve in Acts 19 to know that correct understanding matters.

The twelve were originally baptized to obey God, so they thought. That was certainly a good motive, yet it proved insufficient at that time. Many today, without doubt, are baptized for the wrong reasons, and thus we can reasonably be assured their baptisms are ineffective. If I am baptized solely to become a member of a denominational church—a church that did not even exist in New Testament times—that is not the baptism Jesus authorized.

If one says, “My denomination is the New Testament church one reads about in the Bible,” then the next question is, “Why is that church not named in the New Testament?” If your church is called the XYZ Church (denomination), I do not read about a church named XYZ Church in the Bible, so baptism into it is not the same as baptism into Christ's church. But I drift from the main subject of this article, back to it.

Why was the baptism of these men into John's baptism not acceptable? Chronology seems to be the answer. John's baptism was valid for a time, but that time was prior to Jesus' death on the cross. The cross made all the difference in the world—not just regarding baptism, but in everything. Everything changed at the cross. Jesus' shed blood changed the world mankind lives in.

These twelve men had been baptized with John's baptism after Jesus' death on the cross. When Jesus died on the cross, mankind passed into the Christian Age. John the Baptist lived, taught, and made disciples in the Mosaic Age. The baptism he performed was of and from God.

“(And when all the people, including the tax collectors, heard this, they acknowledged God's way of righteousness, because they had been baptized with John's baptism. But since the Pharisees and experts in the law had not been baptized by him, they rejected the plan of God for themselves.)” (Luke 7:29–30, CSB)

But it was God's eternal plan to move on into the age of Christ, the Christian Age.

The twelve at Ephesus were not baptized by John the Baptist. Had they been baptized by John, there would have been no need of another baptism. No one baptized with John's baptism before the cross ever needed to be baptized again, for John's baptism was of God and was for the forgiveness of sins (Mark 1:4), and once one's sins are forgiven, they are forgiven.

But John died before Christ died on the cross. It was a relatively short period between John's death and Christ's death, but during that time people were still living under the Law of Moses, and John's baptism—the one he taught—was still being preached, taught, and practiced by his disciples and remained valid. It is most likely, although not certain, that the twelve had been baptized by Apollos, who was in Ephesus before Paul. It is said of Apollos that he was “an eloquent man who was competent in the use of the Scriptures … instructed in the way of the Lord … teaching accurately … although he knew only John's baptism” (Acts 18:24–25, CSB).

To summarize and clarify, John's baptism, the baptism he taught, was valid only up until the time Jesus died on the cross. Anyone baptized with John's baptism at a later date needed to be baptized into Christ.

We now arrive at the Twelve's rebaptism, if one wants to call it that. It is clear that Paul is not satisfied with their first baptism. What is often overlooked, however, is why Paul seems to be demanding that they be baptized anew. The denominational world is overflowing with people who believe and teach that salvation is unrelated to baptism, teaching salvation by faith alone, and saying baptism is not necessary. If it is not necessary, why is Paul bothering these twelve men with it?

A second point, often overlooked, is that Paul ties belief in Jesus to baptism.

“Paul said, ‘John baptized with a baptism of repentance, telling the people that they should believe in the one who would come after him, that is, in Jesus.’ When they heard this, they were baptized into the name of the Lord Jesus” (Acts 19:4–5, CSB).

When one believes in Jesus, what follows? Baptism. When you come to believe in Jesus, what do you do? You are baptized. Why do you do it? Because the One you believe—Jesus—taught it (John 3:3–5; Matt. 28:19; Mark 16:16). You cannot believe in Jesus and at the same time doubt what He taught.

A very similar thing is recorded earlier under Philip's preaching in Samaria in Acts 8. “Philip went down to a city in Samaria and proclaimed the Messiah to them” (Acts 8:5, CSB). “When they believed Philip … both men and women were baptized” (Acts 8:12, CSB). That is what happens when the true gospel is preached.

When the twelve were baptized correctly under Paul's teaching, the Bible says Paul laid his hands on the men, and the Holy Spirit came on them, and they began to speak in tongues. This confirms what was said earlier: when Paul inquired of them about receiving the Holy Spirit (Acts 19:2), he was asking about the miraculous measure of it.

Do you believe in Jesus? If so, you know the next step. If these twelve men needed to be baptized, so does every disciple. That is the Great Commission: baptize the disciples (Matt. 28:19). God is no respecter of persons. Those who believe Jesus, believe what He said and taught, and are baptized. No exceptions.

[To download this article or print it out click here.]

Jewish and Catholic Tradition

What is the role of tradition in religion? Is it positive or negative? In Jesus’ day, I think we have to say it was negative. I remind the reader that while Jesus, a Jew, walked the earth, he was living under the Law of Moses. Christianity, the religion he brought to the world, only began after his resurrection. In fact, without the resurrection there could be no Christianity. “If Christ is not risen, your faith is futile.” (1 Cor. 15:17 NKJV)

Jesus had to deal with tradition while living under the Law of Moses with the Jewish leaders of the land. He and his disciples were constantly harassed by those who felt he and his followers were breaking the law of God. Those accusations were based on what – scripture or tradition? Obviously, on Jewish tradition, but one has to remember the Jewish authorities believed their tradition had God as its source, just as do the Catholics of our day.

Let us hear Jesus on the topic: “Then the scribes and Pharisees who were from Jerusalem came to Jesus, saying, ‘Why do your disciples transgress the tradition of the elders? For they do not wash their hands when they eat bread.’ He answered and said to them, ‘Why do you also transgress the commandment of God because of your tradition? For God commanded, saying, 'honor your father and your mother'; and, 'he who curses father or mother, let him be put to death.' But you say, 'Whoever says to his father or mother, "Whatever profit you might have received from me is a gift to God” then he need not honor his father or mother.' Thus you have made the commandment of God of no effect by your tradition.” (Mat 15:1-6 NKJV, see also Mark 7:1-13)

The Pharisees were always watching Jesus for any transgression of their traditions, traditions which to them were equivalent in authority to the writings of Moses and the prophets. There would be no healing on the Sabbath, no plucking of grain to satisfy hunger on the Sabbath. The law of man-made tradition was made in their eyes into the law of God, and they would hear of nothing else. Scripture alone was not enough. It had to be interpreted by those in positions of power within the religious community which resulted in additions, subtractions, and perversions. Do you see any parallels in this to Roman Catholicism? You should.

So that is where we were with tradition in the days when Jesus walked the earth. Jewish tradition continued to evolve with time. Judaism today is a religion far distant from the Law of Moses.

The apostle Paul spoke of tradition in some of his writings. In Gal. 1:14, he talks of his time before his conversion to Christianity when he was “exceedingly zealous for the traditions of my fathers.” (NKJV) This would have been during the time when he held the coats of those who stoned Stephen to death, “And when the blood of your martyr

Stephen was shed, I also was standing by consenting to his death, and guarding the clothes of those who were killing him.” (Act 22:20 NKJV) This is where a blind zeal for religious tradition can lead a man.

Paul further says, “Many of the saints I shut up in prison, having received authority from the chief priests; and when they were put to death, I cast my vote against them.” (Acts 26:10 NKJV) This, of course, was before his conversion to Christianity, but while he was enslaved to religious tradition.

After Paul’s conversion, in later life, he warned against tradition, “See to it that no one takes you captive by philosophy and empty deceit, according to human tradition.” (Col 2:8 ESV) So, we have been warned.  

But did not Paul speak positively about traditions? He did so in 1 Cor. 11:2, 2 Thess. 2:15, and 2 Thess. 3:6. To the Corinthians, he said he praised them that they kept “the traditions as I delivered them to you.” (NKJV) To the Thessalonians, he said, “Hold the traditions which you were taught, whether by word or our epistle.” (2 Thess. 2:15 NKJV)

What are we to make of these statements? Just this, if Paul delivered the traditions to them, to the Corinthians, then that is what we would call teaching or doctrine as he spoke by the Holy Spirit being an inspired apostle. What else would you call it? A number of versions do not even use the word traditions here. The King James Version uses the word “ordinances,” the New Living Translation uses the word “teachings” as does the Good News Bible, while the LITV (the Literal Translation) uses the word “doctrines.” It was not tradition in the sense in which men use the word today, but rather Christian doctrine that Paul delivered to them.

The same thing can be said for the 2 Thess. 2:15 passage where the NIV uses the word “teachings,” the NLT “the teaching,” the Good News Bible “truths,” YLT (Young’s Literal Translation) “deliverances.” The same can be said regarding the 2 Thess. 3:6 passage in that the same Greek word is used in all three passages, the word for traditions being in Greek the word “paradosis.” So the point to be made is that what Paul was speaking of was not traditions in the sense in which we normally use that word, but was speaking of his own spirit-inspired teachings he had delivered to those to whom he spoke or was writing to.

The apostle Peter also spoke of tradition. He speaks of ‘aimless conduct received by tradition from your fathers” (1 Peter 1:18 NKJV) as he spoke to the Jews of the

Dispersion. One can surely see Peter was not speaking positively of the tradition they had accepted.

One can ask the question, one ought to, why should we blindly accept religious tradition -- why? Is it because it cannot be wrong? Why can’t it be wrong? If it could be wrong in the first century it can also be wrong in the twenty-first century.

Catholic Tradition

We turn now to tradition in Roman Catholicism.  The reader likely already knows that with Catholics tradition is on par with scripture in terms of having authority over one’s spiritual life. Traditional Catholicism has rejected the Bible alone as being a sufficient guide to eternal life. Furthermore, they have historically rejected the idea that a person unaided by the church can understand the Bible on their own. The church will tell you what it means. You can have a Ph.D. in biblical languages, you can be brilliant intellectually, but unaided by the church, you are helpless in discerning the true meaning of scripture. If you want to know what scripture means, you must listen to the church. They will tell you.  What is a correct interpretation of a passage? Whatever the church tells you.

You cannot combat tradition in Catholicism. Why not? Because the church has declared itself infallible in its teachings and people blindly accept that. It is an easy way out of being personally responsible. The Catholic Church has made itself untouchable. You can no more combat it than you could Judaism in the first century. Masses of people died in Judaism despite Christianity, and masses will die in Catholicism despite Christianity.

Eve did not get a pass from God for being deceived, nor did the man of God, who, after prophesying against Jeroboam’s altar in 1 Kings 13, was then deceived by an old prophet and paid for it with his life. Should we hope for a pass if we allow ourselves to be deceived by man’s tradition, whether in Judaism or Catholicism?

There is an aspect of Catholic tradition that most people who are not Catholic are unaware of. In Catholicism, tradition does not mean what you naturally think it means.

With most of us, tradition refers to what has gone on in the past and then been handed down. We assume then that in religion it would be what has been handed down through the ages from the first century. That would not be necessarily so; it seems to depend.

Get on the internet and search for a timeline on Catholic dogmas. When you do so you will find lists giving the dates of when this and that dogma became official. There will be many of them crossing the span of the past two thousand years. If these various dogmas came from scripture or the first century, they would have been incorporated from the beginning of Christianity. They came from tradition, Catholic tradition. I bring this to your attention to make the point that Catholic tradition does not go back all the way to the beginning of Christianity. It jumps in wherever the powers that be want it.

Catholics disagree among themselves on the meaning of tradition. The traditional view separates tradition from scripture.  In Catholicism, only by combining the two can you have the sacred deposit of faith, as some call it, or put another way, “the word of God.” Scripture by itself is only partial, only part of the word of God. The word of God in Catholicism requires both scripture and tradition for completion.

A second school of thought in Catholicism sees tradition as being whatever the church says it is. I know, I know, no Catholic would agree with this statement, but hear me out. With this second school of thought in Catholicism, all of Catholic tradition is already found in written scripture, but the church has to bring it out (by its interpretation). Thus, they can find in scripture things the average reader cannot even imagine – transubstantiation, the papacy, Mary’s Immaculate Conception, her Assumption, purgatory, etc., things you need the church to help you find. Some describe Catholic tradition as being “living.” I would certainly agree with that, living and growing, and that is just the problem with it. Any doctrine in Catholicism has to be either from scripture or tradition, so pick your doctrine and tell us where its origin was.

Roman Catholicism is a religion separate unto itself. It is not Christianity. I have no problem saying it evolved out of Christianity, but it long ago ceased to be Christian. So, why are we surprised? Did not the same evolution from truth into error occur in Judaism? Even the New Testament teaches there will be and must be a falling away before the second coming of Christ (2 Thess. 2:3). The scripture teaches there will be a falling away, so let us not talk and act like it cannot happen.

Let me play the role of a Catholic for a moment. As a Catholic, I declare the Catholic Church to be the one and only church of the New Testament. I claim to believe scripture, so what do I do with 2 Thess. 2:3, “Let no one deceive you by any means; for that day (the last day – DS) will not come unless the falling away comes first, and the man of sin is revealed, the son of perdition”? (NKJV) It says my church will fall away, for after all, my church is the only true church, according to Catholicism.

I cannot say this passage refers to the Reformation. Why not? There is no one in Protestantism sitting “as God in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God.” (2 Thess. 2:4). In fact, since Protestantism is so diverse and divided, it is hard to see how that could ever be. And, yet, believing what I do, remember I am putting myself in the shoes of a devout Catholic, how can there ever be a falling away in my church since the church is said to be infallible, full of the spirit of God? I cannot solve this dilemma for the Catholics. I am sure the Catholics will have an answer if pressed, and when they do, it will be said to be infallible, for you see that is the way it is in Catholicism.

[To download this article or print it out click here.]