Sunday Sermons
Teaching the Taught
Greetings all / Especially to our visitors / Not the preacher here / hope you find this helpful
Many of us have seen statistics like “77% of those in the northwest don’t go to church”.
The fields truly are ripe for harvest.
Many of these people probably know very little about the Bible
At our most recent Gospel Meeting Berry Kercheville provided us with some material that would be great for these “untaught” folks.
It’s really good stuff…
- Survey of the Old Testament
- Creation, the Garden, the Flood, the Divided Kingdom, key people and prophecies
- The problem with sin
- The New Testament
- What Christ did for us regarding that sin
Great stuff.
Matt 28:18-20 says: “Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit…
Teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you, and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age”.
Those are our marching orders…and Berry’s material is ideal for the 77% of those non-Church-going, non-taught folks.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
But what about the other 23% of people…
- Who may have already been “taught”
- know a lot about the Bible, and
- in some cases, may know at least parts of it, like the OT, even better than you?
- But are in error
They may be believers, go to church, and love God.
They may not be looking for anything different.
They may be perfectly comfortable with their belief set.
They even may be out actively trying to study with or convert people.
So who is going to teach these “taught”, church-going people?
If they are in error, then our “marching orders” are in regards to them as well.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In these cases, Berry’s material, starting with the Old Testament and first principles, may not be the best approach.
There is no “one size fits all” method.
Don’t misunderstand me, what I am saying is that for people who are…
- Bible-believing,
- active church-going people,
- and convinced they are saved,
there may be a better approach than going through a complete overview of the Bible, that they may know as well as you.
That’s why I am calling this sermon “Teaching the Taught”
What you are about to hear may not be new to you.
If you are a Christian then you may think “but I am already convinced!”
Great.
But this is not about convincing you, this is about convincing someone else.
In particular, this lesson is about convincing someone who is already convinced that they are saved…
yet they are in error, and lost.
What’s this? There are unsaved believers? Yes.
From Jesus himself in Matt 7:21-23…
“Not everyone who says unto Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father who is in heaven…
Many will say to Me on that day ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your name cast out demons, and in Your name perform many miracles?’…
And then I will declare unto them ‘I never knew you; depart from me, you who practice lawlessness”.
Here we have “religious people”, believers, who are outside of Christ because even though sincere, practicing scriptural and spiritual lawlessness…outside of the authority of Christ.
Jesus tells them “I never knew you”.
We need to be prepared to persuade these people…
Who really truly believe they are right with God
And yet, they are in error, and in danger.
Here are a few passages regarding our approach to this target audience of sincere, but lost souls…
2 Tim 2:24-26 – The Lord’s bond-servant must not be quarrelsome, but be kind to all, able to teach, patient when wronged…
With gentleness correcting those who are in opposition, if perhaps God may grant them repentance leading to the knowledge of the truth…
And they may come to their senses and escape the snare of the devil, having been taken captive by him to do his will.
Col 4:5-6 – Conduct yourselves with wisdom toward outsiders, making the most of the opportunity…
Let your speech always be with grace, seasoned with salt, so that you will know how you should respond to (or “answer”) each person.
I Peter 3:15 – Sanctify Christ as Lord in your hearts, always being ready to make a defense (or “give an answer”) to everyone who asks you to give an account (or “a reason”) for the hope that is in you, yet with gentleness and reverence”.
In summary…
· prepare yourselves by studying, to know what to say and how to answer
· find someone, and get out there and teach them
· help and persuade these souls, with love and patience
These studies can take place in a variety of ways,
including over long distances,
even with people you don’t see anymore…
or maybe have never met in person.
Use that clever thing Al Gore invented: the internet,
e-mail,
church websites,
and discussion forums.
You might try asking the questions & introducing the discussion that you will hear in this sermon.
At the very least you will cause people to think.
It will teach you how to teach them.
Be sure and point people to our congregation’s website, its sermons and commentaries
Have a thick skin in internet discussions because people will often say things on-line that they would never say in person…
- Remember you are not there to pick a fight or win an argument; you are seeking to bring the truth to good and honest hearts.
- Don’t win a battle (an argument) and lose the war (their soul)
- Remember this isn’t about you. It’s about them and their soul. All discussion should keep that firmly in mind.
- They may well get personal, esp if they feel their position is weakening. Don’t go there. Remember: correct them with “gentleness” and “reverence”. If the discussion digresses to getting personal, the focus is lost.
- Put yourself in their shoes. You may be challenging core beliefs that they hold dear…
taught to them by well-meaning people they know, love, and trust. Unfortunately, sincerity without truth is empty. People used to sincerely believe the world was flat.
- The objective is to lay out a logical, orderly case for the truth. State your case, with evidence, just like a “good lawyer” would…
what it means or how it applies to them…
as it does to you and to everyone else.
I will be the first to admit that I have learned these lessons the hard way…having alienated some.
My hope is to leverage those hard knocks into better and quicker success in the future, and to share those lessons learned with you this morning to help you be successful.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Start with common ground,
Find out if they believe in God, the Bible, and go to church.
Ask them…
“Do you believe the Bible the true and complete Word of God, accurate and authoritative for all time?
Of these, having them confirm belief in the Bible as the Word of God is critical.
If they believe it is corrupted and unreliable then you will have to address that first.
One notable group I have studied with will heartily affirm that they believe the Bible is the Word of God, and reliable.
But they will do so only as long as it suits them.
Because once you start to show how their “latter revelation” book contradicts the Bible, guess which one they back away from.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Like Berry said, as when studying with novices, ask questions of these church-goers whenever possible, rather than drop “verse bombs” on them.
Let them answer those questions, and then ask again, after pointing out verses on the topic that they can find in their very own trusted Bible.
The question you want to get to is “what does your church teach regarding what one must do to be saved?”.
A follow-up question, might be “What role, if any, does baptism play?”
Or ask them: “what would you tell a person who shows up at your door and asks that very question?”
Here is the point: Is there any question anyone can possibly ask that is more important?
Where the correct answer to a question is more vital?
for someone with a good and honest heart…
with a sincere desire to please God, be saved, and go to heaven?
How important is it if they get the WRONG answer?
Tragically, all too often the wrong answer to this all-important question is given.
Job #1 is making sure we are all on the same page regarding “what one must do to be saved”.
Is there anything more important than this?
- What if a person with a good and honest heart asks someone what they must do to be saved, and are told "you are saved by faith only", and…
- someone else tells this believer "repent of your sins, confess Jesus Christ is the Son of God, and be baptized for the remission of sins", and…
- someone else tells them "mail in two box tops with an essay in 200 words or less on ‘why you want to go to heaven’".
Ask them “Do you see a problem here?”
If we think it is okay to have conflicting answers on this question then we are kidding ourselves. Get them to see this.
From my perspective, having a Bible study over various interesting Bible topics with people from other churches may be worthwhile, and may open some doors, butnothing is more important than getting Job #1 right.
The rest, by comparison, is "details".
If the person is not saved, then having other Bible studies on various topics is a little like discussing “how best to arrange the deck chairs on the Titanic”.
This is something you must get across to the person as the most vital of questions that we must agree on, because any other Bible discussion is “window dressing” by comparison.
So what answers are you most likely to get for the “what must I do to be saved?” question?
- That “we are saved by faith only”
- It is by grace, a free gift, and that there is nothing we can DO to merit it…
- That baptism is something we do as “an outward sign of an inward faith”…
- Something that a saved person does, as a symbol.
Like with most error, there is some truth here.
Ask them to provide supporting scripture.
Quickly agree with them on the things they say that are true.
But we want to work toward “the whole truth”…
what is the whole truth in the scriptures when we read about people being saved?
What was the process of going from “lost” to “saved”?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
While you are addressing their position. Offer yours.
Specifically, that there is something we must DO to be saved.
We do have a role in our own salvation.
Does this mean we are diminishing what Jesus did for us on the cross? Or that we are saving ourselves? Absolutely not.
So let’s look at the gift of salvation...the free gift of having our sins forgiven.
Is there something we must do to receive it? Yes.
Some questions for them to ponder...
1. Acts 2 - v. 22-36: Peter preached to those sinners who crucified Christ;
v. 37: now believing, they were pricked in their hearts, and asked what they "must do"… (ah…there is something we must do.)
V 38: “Peter said to them, “Repent and each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit”.
What did the inspired Apostle tell these believers to do?
For what purpose?
Ask them “if these people were already saved by faith only, then why didn't Peter just say so?”.
Peter’s answer to “what must we do?” would have been “nothing!”.
Why did he tell these believers to be "baptized for the remission of sins"?
Because even though they were believers, they were still lost (still in their sins) until and unless they submitted to baptism, just like you and me.
Those that did so were saved…added to the Lord’s church (v 47).
Is faith required – Yes.
But faith only? No, not unless this inspired Apostle was wrong.
Note also: James 2:17-19.
2. Mark 16:16: “He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he who has debelieved shall be condemned.”
Simple question: what two things are connected together by "and" as conditions to being saved?
Here's an example: your mom says "on the way home from school go to the store and buy a loaf of bread, and I will be very pleased with you".
Now if you go by the store on the way home from school but do not buy a loaf of bread, have you obeyed her?
No.
Why? Because the two things she told you to do in order for her to be pleased are locked together by the word "and".
"Go to the store and buy a loaf of bread and I will be pleased" is no different than "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved".
Both conditions are requirements in order to fully obey, and in this case, to be saved.
And if you don’t do the first - go by the store (or believe) - then the second action of buying a loaf of bread (or being baptized) is moot.
This is why the verse doesn’t end with “but he who has disbelieved and not been baptized shall be condemned”.
If mom asks “did you go by the store on the way home?” and you say “no”, then there is no point in her asking about the loaf of bread, is there?
3. Acts 22 – Is the account of Paul’s conversion. Turn with me there.
He is on the road to Damascus intending to persecute Christians.
Verses 6-9 – the Lord appears to him
V. 10 - Paul asked the Lord what he must "do", and Jesus told him to go into Damascus in order to find out what he must "do".
So what was he then told to do in v. 16?
Let them read it… “Now why do you tarry / delay? Arise and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on the name of the Lord”.
What was he told to do? For what purpose?
If he - as a believer - was saved by faith only, then he would have no sins to wash away!
If “faith only” saves then Saul was not “tarrying”, he was already saved!
Let you friend draw the logical conclusion here.
Note that Paul was not told to “say a Sinner’s Prayer”, nor is anyone else in the Bible.
People don’t “pray their sins away” or “pray their way to salvation”.
We have no right to substitute a man-made “Sinner’s Prayer” for God’s Plan of Salvation.
Note also that Paul still needed to be baptized to wash away his sins even after he…
- Has an “experience”
- Believes
- Repents (as indicated in another account of Paul’s conversion, in Acts 9, verse 9)
Here is an open question for them to ponder…to discover the truth without you hammering them…
Given that Acts 22 describes the conversion of Paul, at what point (at what verse) was he saved?
If they say it is at any point prior to verse 16, then they have Paul saved BEFORE he is baptized, before having his sins washed away.
The same question can be applied to those who crucified Christ in Acts chapter 2…
If they say any verse prior to verse 38 then they have people being saved who are still in their sins.
The Bible clearly teaches…
that baptism (immersion in water) for the remission of sins is when and where the penitent believer's sins are washed away by the shed blood of Christ.
It is when and where we "put on Christ" (Gal 3:26-27).
The book of Acts is full of people…
- being preached "Christ"
- "the Gospel"
- "the Word of Lord"
and immediately upon them believing, they are baptized.
Necessary conclusion: the message of preaching Christ / the Gospel / the Word of the Lord included the necessity to be baptized.
Speaking of “immediately”…
Ask them if they’ve ever noticed the urgency of baptism in the Bible once someone believes…
- Acts 2:41 - "that very day"
- Acts 22:16 - "why do you delay?"
- Acts 16:33 - "that very hour of the night"
- Acts 8:36 - "Look! Water! What prevents me from being baptized?”
There was no waiting for some monthly ceremony…
It was urgent.
I think that speaks volumes about its importance, certainly as more than just a symbol for a saved person to eventually get around to doing.
It is the line between “lost” and “saved”, and they understood that.
Bottom line: any “path to salvation” that does not include baptism for the remission of sins…
- or faith (Heb 11:6)
- or repentence (Luke 13:3)
- or confessing Christ as the Son of God (Rom 10:10)
must be rejected.
=========================================================
This last section is on Objections and how to answer them…
These are collected from discussions with many people, over many years.
It is my hope that these objections & the answers will help “equip you”.
For the sake of time this morning I’ll have to “ask” and “answer” these questions myself,
but remember, when you are discussing these things with people, be sure and ask THEM questions and let THEM answer.
Let them discover & realize the necessary conclusions and actions required that the Bible reveals, instead of being told.
Objection…
1. What about Eph 2:8-9…
“For by grace ye are saved through faith, and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God;
Not as a result of works, so that no one may boast”
Answer: They are implying that we believe baptism is a work, and that we believe we are saved by works.
First, agree with them that it is a great verse.
Now what is it teaching?
- We must have faith
- Through faith we are saved by God’s grace
- We cannot save ourselves or “earn” salvation by doing works (or works alone)
- Salvation is a gift of God
It is not teaching - nor do we believe - that baptism is a “work”, or that we are “saved by works”.
- You might note that nowhere does the Bible call baptism a "work". Interestingly though, it does refer to belief / faith as a "work" in John 6:29.
- Baptism is not a “work”, it is a commandment.
- Do we need to obey God’s commandments?
- Heb 5:8-9 says that “God is the author of eternal salvation to all that obey him”…his commandments are to be obeyed.
- Agree that we do not save ourselves, and we do not "earn" our salvation, but that is not the same thing as saying we have no role in our salvation.
- Agree that we cannot be saved apart from the blood of Christ…we can only be saved when the blood of Christ washes away our sins.
- The question is: “when and where does that happen?”
- Is it a free gift? Yes.
- Did we earn it? No.
- Like any other gift, is there something we must do to receive it? Yes.
- Think about a birthday present. Is it free? Yes.
- Did we earn it? No.
- Is there something we must do to receive it? Yes. We must show up at the party, extend our hands and receive the gift, unwrap it, etc.
Having said all that, is baptism found in the context of Ephesians chapter 2? YES…
We find "mercy" in verse 4.
We find "grace in" verse 5.
What else do we find in verse 5?
That "we were dead in our transgressions, made us alive together with Christ", and in verse 6: Christ "raised us up with Him".
Note: this is the same language used in Romans 6 verse 4: "we are buried with Him through baptism (immersed in water) into death, so that as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, so we too might walk in newness of life".
But that's not all - It is the same language as in Col 2:12-13 - we are buried (immersed) with Him in baptism, dead in our transgressions, raised up, made us alive together with Him, having our transgressions forgiven.
Lastly, the same Eph 2 language found in Titus 3:4-5, and again the reference to baptism is clear.
Verse 5 says "He saved us not on the basis of deeds we have done in righteousness (or on the basis of works, just like in Eph 2:8-9), but according to His mercy (also found in Eph 2:4) by the washing of regeneration (there's baptism).
Notice that the “washing of regeneration” (baptism) is clearly identified as not being a “deed” (or “work”).
Verse 5 shows we are saved not on the basis of deeds / works…but how?...”according to His mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewing by the Holy Spirit”.
The “not, but” construction here clearly identifies baptism as not being a work, but a basis for being saved.
Bottom line: if you look at the whole context of Ephesians 2 - not just verses 8 & 9, and look at the same language used in the companion passages of Romans 6:3-11, Col 2:12-13, and Titus 3:4-5, it is clear that baptism is there, and is an essential step in one becoming saved.
Objection…
2. “Verse A (any verse they might cite) doesn’t say anything about the need to be baptized”.
Answer:
So what? They still have a problem with the many that do.
Shall we tear out the ones that do because we have verses that don’t?
That is about as logical as throwing out all verses that don’t contain the necessity of faith.
For any verse, that - when isolated – appears to teach that we are saved by faith only, ask if this verse “trumps” or cancels out verses that clearly teach the need for…
- Repentance (Luke 13:3)
- Confessing Christ (Rom 10:9-10)
- or being baptized for the remission of sins (Acts 2:38)
Are the verses at war with each other?
Do they conflict?
Which of them are “truth”?
Ask them what they want to do with Acts 2:38 that commands repentance AND baptism, but not faith?
Ask them what they think about a verse like Mark 16:16 that shows the necessity of faith AND baptism in the same verse.
Shall we now not only accept just certain verses, but only parts of certain verses?
None of the verses they (or anyone else) can cite include all of the following: "belief", "repenting" of our sins, "confessing" Christ is the Son of God, and being "baptized" for the remission of sins.
There is no one verse that does.
And yet all of these in various places are commanded unto salvation.
So ask them what they want to do about that?
Does this mean that we can cling to one verse that teaches any single item from the list above, and disregard the rest?
Or is the SUM of God's Word "truth"?
Isn’t it reasonable to conclude that all things said regarding the matter of salvation are important?
Or is it better to say "that's my one verse, that's my ticket to heaven, don't show me anything else!”
Remember that the numbered verse structure was put in the Bible by man as a convenience.
Don’t use it as justification for excluding any teaching.
If the teaching is anywhere in the New Testament then it is really “there” and it is really true.
The question is “Does the New Testament (not verse “X”) teach the need to be baptized for the remission of sins?”.
Answer: yes.
What verses you find that in is really irrelevant.
-------------------------
Why pick on baptism?
Are we acceptable to God without repenting because a particular verse mentions faith, but not repentance?
How about confessing Christ as Lord?
Romans 10:9 says “that if you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved”.
Why not pick on “confessing with your mouth Jesus as Lord”?
This verse says that belief AND confessing with your mouth Jesus as Lord” is required for salvation.
In John 12:42-43 the rulers believed in Jesus but would not confess him.
They were not saved by faith only, and neither were the demons in James 2:19.
Do you still want to claim salvation by faith only?
We are not saved by faith alone, repentance alone (Luke 13:3), confessing Jesus as Lord alone, or baptism alone.
Don’t pick and choose.
Put it all together.
The SUM of God’s Word is “truth”.
-------------------------
Your friend may counter that “there are literally dozens of passages in the New Testament which say that we can receive salvation, eternal life, righteousness, justification, forgiveness of sins, and so on, through faith in Christ…and that baptism is not mentioned in any of those passages”.
First, there are far more verses on the necessity of baptism then they realize, or are willing to admit.
But for the sake of argument…
let’s say there are 10 times as many that teach the necessity of faith compared to the number that teach the necessity of baptism.
Again, so what?
I don’t care if it is 100:1.
That one verse is still truth, and it is there for a reason.
Exactly how many times does the Bible have to teach something for it to be true?
1 time? 5 times? 100 times?
Ask them what it would take to satisfy them.
I can see it now on the Judgment Day…
“God, you’ve got it all wrong. You see, I counted, and truth “A” is taught “X times”, but truth “B” is only taught “Y” times…
So it was obvious to me that I could disregard truth “B”.
Now I would agree that without faith nothing else matters. Because it is the logical first requirement.
Not the only requirement, but the logical first requirement.
Is it so unreasonable for there to be more written about this foundational matter?
“He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved, but he that believeth not shall be condemned.”
If you can’t accept the first logical requirement then the second requirement is a moot point.
A non-believer being baptized is just getting wet.
Even the passages that mention "faith" do not mention "faith alone". John 3:16 does not say that one is saved by "faith alone". Man is putting the "alone" in these verses.
Saying that John 3:16 and other passages teach that one is saved by faith alone and apart from baptism makes about as much sense as citing 1 Peter 3:21 and claiming that one is saved by baptism alone without any need for faith.
-------------------------
If one verse says "a" and "b" are required, and another says "b" and "c" are required, and another verse says "a" and "d" are required, then a prudent person would conclude that "a", "b", "c", AND "d" are required. The New Testament is not a cafeteria line in which we can choose what we want to believe, and disregard other things.
Different things were being emphasized in different verses. Often the epistles of Paul and others were in answer to questions, assuming certain things and trying to clear up other things.
I put it as "a", "b", "c", and "d" so that preconceived notions would not enter in. To not take all the verses together would be similar to taking Acts 2:38...
"Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.”
and claiming faith is unnecessary since it isn't mentioned.
Don’t miss that point…
Acts 2:38 does not teach the need to believe. So is faith not required?
No, faith was not taught here because it was evident that these people already believed (v37: “pierced to the heart”).
It was not necessary to tell these believers to believe, but it was necessary to tell these believers to be baptized for the remission of sins.
---------------------------
-
Finally, even in verses that appear to be teaching “faith only”, ask them if they agree that a true and saving faith would include…
- Repentance? Or can we continue our old pattern of sin?
- Confessing Christ? Or can we fail to confess our faith that He is the Son of God, or deny Him?
- Baptism for the remission of sins? Or can we remain in our sins?
---------------------------
Agree that our standing on the Judgment Day does not stand on baptism alone.
But neither does it stand on faith alone (James 2:17-19),
repentance alone,
confessing Christ alone,
being sincere alone,
or simply by being a "good and moral person".
The SUM of God’s word is truth.
Objection…
3. Well what if you are on the way to get baptized and you are killed in a car accident on the way?
Answer: At any point someone is supposedly saved, including by faith only, the person can still be killed right before.
Say a person in a car had been reading the Bible, meditating on it, praying about it, etc. And right before he would have had that faith (only) that supposedly saves him, he is hit and killed.
Again, at any point someone is saved (truly saved or otherwise), they could still be killed moments before.
It is an empty argument.
Objection…
4. If baptism washes away our sins, then why don’t we have to be baptized all over again every time we sin?
Answer: Ask them: “If we are saved by faith only, then why don’t we have to believe all over again every time we sin?”
It still is a matter of what one must do be saved, or “at what point are we saved?”
They believe we have forgiveness for our past sins (are saved) when we believe and accept Christ.
The Bible teaches the believer has forgiveness of his past sins (is saved) when they are baptized for the remission of sins.
In both cases, the sins under consideration are those that they have committed up to that point, with the truly saved person then continuing to be forgiven of future sins as they repent of them.
It is yet another empty argument.
Furthermore, we find Christians (baptized believers) who sin in the New Testament, and they are not told that they need to be re-baptized…
1. Simon in Acts 8…
- He believed and was baptized in Acts 8:13.
- Later, Peter rightly tells Simon in verse 20 that he sinned by wanting the power to lay on hands in order to impart the Holy Spirit for the wrong intentions
- In verse 22 he was told to “repent” and “pray”. This baptized believer was not told to be re-baptized.
- I John 1 is written to Christians…
- Verse 8 says “If we say that we have no sin, we are deceiving ourselves and the truth is not in us”.
- Verse 9 says “If we confess ours sins, He is faithful and righteous to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness”.
- Nothing is said about the Christian being re-baptized because he has sinned.
Objection…
5. Well, you must believe in “baptismal regeneration”…that there is power in the water.
Answer: The water (itself) doesn’t save anyone. There is no power in water.
The power is in the blood of Christ, which provides us with the remission of sins.
And here is the point: baptism is when and where that happens.
It is when and where the blood of Christ washes away our sins.
Also, refer them to Titus 3:4-5, discussed in “Objection #1” above.
Objection…
6. “After I received Christ as my savior I was baptized as an act of obedience to Him, as a symbol. However my baptism didn't save me”.
Answer: Be careful about dropping a “verse bomb” here, but ask them to read I Peter 3:21…
“Corresponding to that (referring to how Noah and his family were saved through water from the world of sin), baptism now saves you – not the removal of dirt from the body, but an appeal to God for a good conscience – through the resurrection of Jesus Christ”.
The “baptism now saves you” part should get their attention.
While you have it, let them see how this is not talking about a bath that removes the physical dirt off of our bodies…
but baptism to wash away our sins…
through which we are making an appeal to God for a good (clean) conscience.
Objection…
7. “What about the thief of the cross? Jesus told him he’d be with Him in paradise, and yet he wasn’t baptized”…
Answer: The thief is no different than anyone else lived who lived…
- in Old Testament times,
- or prior to the death of Christ,
- or before the Great Commission of Matt 28,
- or before Pentecost in Acts 2, when the commandment to be baptized for the remission of sins was first given.
No one in the OT could have been baptized to avail themselves of Christ’s blood…it had not been shed yet.
In those days they were saved by keeping the law, the Old Law. Today, we are under the New Law, the New Testament.
The promise was made to the thief before Christ died, before he could be baptized into His death (Rom 6:3ff).
You and I, living on the other side of His crucifixion, need to avail ourselves of His shed blood.
Also, no one can prove that the thief wasn’t baptized with the baptism of John, which was the baptism in force prior to the Great Commission and Pentecost (Acts 2).
Remember that Jesus personally forgave a lot of people of their sins prior to His death on the cross, not just the thief. As the Son of God it was certainly his prerogative to do so.
Objection…
8. “All you people care about is baptism”.
Answer: Baptism is no more important in the conversion process than faith, repentance, or confessing Christ.
The reason baptism gets a disproportional amount of attention is simply because it is the key “bone of contention” between us and much of the “faith only” denominational world.
Objection…
9. Acts 16:31 says “believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved”
Answer:
Starting in verse 25 Paul and Silas are in prison
V 26 – a great earthquake freed them
V 27 – the jailor thinks the prisoners are escaping and is about to kill himself
V 28 – Paul says “do yourself no harm”
V 29 – the Jailer falls at their feet
V 30 – he asks “what must I do to be saved?”
V 31 – now we are back at verse 31, the supposed “proof text” that we are saved by faith only…
“believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved”…
now don’t leave off the rest of the verse…“you and your household (family)”.
Now wait, can the jailor be saved by faith only, and his family too?
If one is saved, is their whole family saved too? All agree: of course not.
Old saying: “That which proves too much, proves nothing”.
To take V 31 out of context you would have to not only believe that the jailer is saved by faith only, but that his family is also saved by his faith.
Plus, you would have to believe he / they were saved prior to being taught the Gospel.
Ask your friend what they think about that. Hmmm…
Then ask them to keep reading.
V 32 – the jailer and his family are preached the Gospel (kind of tough to believe it before you’ve heard it, right?)
V 33 – the jailer demonstrates repentance by washing Paul & Silas’s stripes (whip wounds), AND, the jailer and his family are baptized.
V 34 – now, after being taught, repenting, and being baptized, the jailor and his family rejoice.
Verse 31, as a stand-alone so-called “proof text”, proves too much, and therefore proves nothing, because it is taken out of context.
You must look at the whole context to get the whole truth.
What was the answer to “what must I do to be saved”?
Clearly, it included “hear the Gospel, believe it, repent, and be baptized”.
Objection…
10. Acts 10:44-47 44While Peter was still speaking these words, the Holy Spirit fell upon all those who were listening to the message. 45All the circumcised believers who came with Peter were amazed, because the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out on the Gentiles also. 46For they were hearing them speaking with tongues and exalting God. Then Peter answered, 47"Surely no one can refuse the water for these to be baptized who have received the Holy Spirit just as we did, can he?".
The objection is “See - Gentiles believed and received the grace & gift of the Holy Spirit before being baptized.”
Answer – Yes, but they were not yet saved either. The whole point of this event was to prove that the Gospel is for all, Jews and Gentiles (v 44-45). It was to prove that even uncircumcised Gentiles could find favor with God. That they too were eligible to be saved.
This was a message that even the preachers (including Peter!) at that event needed to understand.
And note that these believers were still commanded to be baptized (in water) in v47 – 48
Why?
For the same reason as anyone else, for the remission of sins, to be saved.
In Acts 11:2 Peter is "called out" for doing this. He defends himself verses in 17 & 18 as to why he associated with the Gentiles and had them baptized. He cited the fact that the Holy Spirit came upon them as proof that the Gospel was for Gentiles too, and that who was he to stand in the way?
For those who say “the Holy Spirit doesn’t come upon anyone who isn’t saved”, notice in Acts 11:14 & 15 that Peter says the Holy Spirit came upon the Gentiles only as he began to speak "the words by which you will be saved". Necessary inference: they were not yet saved, even as the Holy Spirit came upon them.
Again, the Holy Spirit fell upon the Gentiles as Peter began to speak words. What words? The words by which they would be saved. Clearly, the Holy Spirit fell upon them before they were saved…before being told the words by which they would be saved. By necessary inference these “words” included the need to be baptized, since this is exactly what they did when Peter finished.
Ironically, many who say "I don't have to be baptized in water because I was baptized by the Holy Spirit" ignore the fact that those in Acts 10 did both (the Holy Spirit baptism came upon them, AND they obeyed the command to be baptized in water).
Objection…
11. Galatians 3:24 - Therefore the Law has become our tutor to lead us to Christ, so that we may be justified by faith.
Answer…
· Yes, faith is essential, but not faith only (again, James 2:17-19)
· Ask them to read the next two verses…
“For all of you are sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus…
For all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourself with Christ”.
· How do we “put on” (clothe ourselves with) Christ?
· Baptism is when and where we "put on Christ".
· Referring again to Col 2:12-13: When we are buried (immersed) with Him in baptism, we are made (spiritually) alive together with Him, having forgiven us all our transgressions.
Same as the other passages: baptism is when and where our sins are forgiven, washed away.
Objection…
12. “The act of water baptism is a symbol of my faith. It symbolizes my faith in Jesus' death, burial and resurrection. But the symbol itself does not save me. Only the reality of what Jesus did on the cross, dying and being resurrected saved me. Because of my belief in what Jesus did to save me, as an act of obedience to Him and a demonstration of my faith - I was baptized. Baptism is like a wedding ring. It is the outward symbol of the internal belief”.
Answer: while this may seem a lovely sentiment, ask them where the scripture is that supports this.
Where does the Bible say it is merely a symbol?
Without “verse bombing” them, point out that you have shared with them passages that baptism is…
- for the remission of sins (Acts 2:38)
- to have "our sins washed away" (Act 22:16)
- to "put on Christ" (Gal 3:26-27)
- to "have our transgressions forgiven" (Col 2:12-13)
- to "save us" (I Peter 3:21).
How do these verses reconcile with the “faith only” position?
While there is no doubt some symbolism in Romans 6 connected our “death” in baptism with Christ’s death on the cross, it is much more than a symbol.
Please turn there with me. Romans 6:3-11 - < READ IT >
Please note...
v3 - when we are baptized into Christ we are baptized into his death
v4 - we are buried (water!) with him in baptism...so that we might walk in newness of life
v5 - that if we become united with Him in the likeness of his death (again, baptism), we shall also be in the likeness of His resurrection (that’s salvation).
Note the conditional "if" in verse 5.
The "united with Him" here is the same thing as the "Putting on Christ" in Gal 3:26-27. When and where does that happen?
v6 - in baptism our old self is crucified, our body of sin is done away with
v7 - we are freed from sin
v8 - if we have died with Christ we shall also live with Him. Note again the conditional "if".
v11 - we become dead to sin, alive to Christ
Conclusion: If we are saved before (or without) being buried with Him in baptism, then this entire passage makes no sense.
Ask them to compare the man and his condition prior to being buried with Christ in baptism, versus after.
Ask “What do you find here regarding the role of baptism in the conversion process?”
Ask “What change has occurred in the person as a result of baptism?”
While there is symbolism involved, it is much more than just a symbol.
It is the final step in the conversion process, going from lost (still in our sins) to saved (forgiven).
Objection…
13. In Acts 2:38 we are baptized “for” (as in “because of”) the remission of sins. For = “because of”
Answer: the word “for” there is the Greek word “eis”, which means “for the purpose of”, or “with a view toward”.
There is an entirely different Greek word for “for”, “dia”, that means “because of”.
We are baptized “for the purpose of” / “with a view toward” the remission of sins.
It is done in order to be saved, not because we are saved.
Objection…
14. “Salvation by faith only has been one of the principal tenets of the Christian faith for hundreds of years”.
Answer: Hundreds?
Isn’t that like saying there are thousands of grains of sand on the world’s beaches?
If “salvation by faith only” is a principal that is only hundreds of years old, and not closer to 2,000 years old, then what has changed these last hundreds of years?
The Bible, or what man has taught?
A prominent denominational figure once said “baptism in the first century was for the remission of sins, but this has since changed”.
Again, did the Bible change?
Who is responsible for this change, and by what authority?
Objection…
15. “People have been arguing this baptism issue for hundreds of years – you and I won’t settle it”.
Answer: What a poor excuse and cop out! (but don’t be this blunt with them!)
Ask them how well they think this will be received on the Judgment Day.
What about that poor soul with the good and honest heart who unfortunately asks the wrong person the question “what must I do to be saved?”?
Besides, if people have been confused about this for hundreds of years then its high time we got it right, isn’t it?
Objection…
16. “You ignore the fact that the Holy Spirit has called individuals unto Himself and brought the sinner to a saving knowledge of his grace without baptism being a part of it. No one comes to the Father unless called by the Holy Spirit".
Answer: This is classic Calvinism. Baptism issue aside, ask them…
Are you saying that the Holy Spirit irresistibly calls people who will be saved? As chooses not to call others?
Does this mean that there are some people will/can/must be saved, and others cannot be saved no matter what? That through no choice of their own the Holy Spirit did not call them, so they are doomed to be lost?
If so, how is the Gospel for all?
