The Baptism of Jesus Christ
Jesus Christ did a couple of things in this baptism which are said explicitly in the text. One, this procedure was submitted to for the purpose of fulfilling all righteousness—no repentance of sin mentioned (Matt 3:13-15). Two this baptism told John that the person he was looking for was here (John 1:22-36). Three, it typifies the baptism he was to undergo, by submitting to the will of the Father by going to the cross (Luke 12:50). This may be harder to establish when not stated outright so you can slap that one under another heresy if you so wish, although I’m sure a full personal study may reveal the correlation between baptism and His death.

The Baptism for the Dead
A much debated text mentioned only in 1 Cor 15:29. Some have said that it refers to a (wrong) practice that was being practiced in Corinth and would be even more stupid if there were no resurrection of the dead. Some say that it means that people, dead in trespasses and sin (now regenerate), when being baptized are showing forth the image of death, burial and resurrection (Romans 6)…but without Christ’s resurrection the picture of baptism is useless. Other’s say that the punctuation is “off” in the verse. Others say that the illustration is of an army and the replenishing of the ranks. The Mormons have said that this is an actual baptism of the dead which can be done by proxy and have subsequently built a doctrine around this verse. That’s another error which will work its way out after studying the general teaching of Scripture.

The Baptism of Believers
Although we see some form of baptism done during Jesus’ lifetime performed by His disciples (John 3:22; 4:1,2), I’m not going to outright say that this is the baptism he commanded in Matthew 28:19 although  I guess you can argue the point. Obviously it deals with water as seen by those disciples performing it during Jesus’ day, but also seeing the action performed throughout the book of Acts.

As in our last post sometimes we would see the Holy Spirit poured out on folk that were already baptized with water (Acts 2, 19) sometimes we would see the Holy Spirit poured out on folk before they were baptized with water (Acts 10) and sometimes we would see the Holy Spirit ignoring the baptism by water and waiting until a couple of Jews showed up on the scene (Acts 8). Obviously we start having a problem with how the baptism of Christ with the Holy Spirit which seems to tie in with what is being said in Ephesians 4 has to do with water if it doesn’t seem to happen exclusively with water.

Stepping back a bit, the resurrected Jesus Christ told His disciples that they were to go, make disciples of all the nations, and baptize them in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit (Matt 28:19). He tells them that those people who have believed and been baptized shall be saved…but those who haven’t believed will be condemned (Mark 16:15, 16).

What can we learn from these verses by themselves?

Firstly it was the responsibility of the disciples to go, make disciples and baptize those disciples. Later we’ll see some other text of it being the responsibility of the new believer as well...but first a word of encouragement. It is your responsibility preachers, teachers; disciples to make sure those new believers get baptized.

Secondly the verse Matt 28:19 isn’t saying “make disciples by baptizing them”. If water baptism was to result in salvation the verse should at least state the method of making sure these folk were disciples was to baptize them.

Thirdly, baptism is done under the name of the triune God. It does not say “names” as in different persons nor does it say “the name of God” or any singular person in the Godhead—it says name and may I suggest that its meaning may deal with authority as in John 16. This would prove important if someone were to think “because X person baptized me, I am definitely saved”. Salvation is not based on the work of man—be it your own work or the work of the baptizer but of the only One who has done the work who baptizes with the Spirit and with Fire, the One who Sent Him and the One who currently convicts the world of sin. Salvation by that One's authority.

Lastly we see that Mark seems to make baptism a condition for salvation. Believe plus baptized equals saved. Unfortunately the context doesn’t seem to support that since the second half of the verse tells us that unbelief results in condemnation…not belief sans water or unbelief plus water…just unbelief. If water had an effective role in salvation this would have been a good point to state the cause of condemnation

Now someone may offer up Acts 2:38 as support that belief plus baptism is what is actually meant in the Mark passage. Peter, after all, told those Jews that they were to 1) Repent, 2) be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the 3) forgiveness of sins and then they would 4) receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

We encounter a wall then and as promised our questions have gotten bigger…Rory's arguement is proving strong for Peter seems to be demanding baptism for salvation but our study thus far doesn’t seem to demand it. What then? “Anathema, Peter, you preach another gospel”? or Is baptism really necessary for salvation? Is the baptism spoken of in Ephesians 4 the baptism mentioned here which results in the gift of the Holy Spirit? And in all this, what about infant baptism—why wasn’t it mentioned?

-r-
A brief note of apology for my method in this study. I normally spend more time looking at the context of the passage to support a proper defense but this subject is so immense that it warrants a book...thankfully several hundred good ones have been written. I've enjoyed "Christian Baptism" by AP Gibbs although sometimes he makes conclusions that should've been further explained. Indeed, most of these arguments could be refuted simply by looking at the context of each passage but I wanted to get the breadth of the topic (with the context) and then look at possible solutions.