Baptism Plainly Commanded

Next Part What Does Baptism Picture?

We have established that Peter commanded repentance, followed by baptism. Now notice Acts 17:30: “And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commands all men everywhere to repent.” This point must be made. God commands repentance, and repentance precedes baptism. Therefore, it could just as surely be said, “God commands all men everywhere to be baptized” or “to repent and be baptized.”

Christ directly commanded His disciples to baptize people so they could be saved. He actually tied salvation directly to baptism. He made it a condition to receive eternal life. His disciples always practiced baptism when new disciples were being converted. Acts 2:41 says, “Then they that gladly received His word were baptized.” Acts 8:5, 12 says, “Then Philip went down to…Samaria…But when they believed Philip preaching the things concerning the kingdom of God [notice this same message tied to what new converts must come to believe], and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized.” There are those who will say that this was merely “baptism by the Holy Spirit.” Ac 8:15-16 make this explanation impossible because Peter and John, “…when they were come down, prayed for them, that they might receive the Holy Spirit: (For as yet [it] was fallen upon none of them: only they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.)”

If the baptism of these converts was merely a baptism “by God’s Spirit,” then how could the scriptures say that these people had been “baptized,” when God’s Spirit had, as of yet, “fallen upon none of them”? This makes no sense—unless baptism and the receiving of God’s Holy Spirit are two totally separate events, just as Acts 2:38 stated!

When the Gentile Italian, Cornelius, and his family were baptized, in Acts 10:44, 47-48, a very direct statement is made about the need to be properly baptized. Peter was used by God to give the first sermon to the Jews discussing baptism (Acts 2:1-47). Ten years later, in A.D. 41, He also used Peter to be the first apostle to preach the gospel to the Gentiles. (Paul was later chosen to be the apostle to the Gentiles.) The devout family of Cornelius received “the gift of the Holy Spirit” (Ac 10:45). In this unique circumstance, now that they had received the Holy Spirit in advance of baptism, Peter’s immediate response was “Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized…And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord.”

This is an unmistakable command to be baptized in water!

Christ’s Great Commission Included Baptism

As has been stated, Christ directly commanded His disciples to baptize. Notice Mark’s gospel account of Christ’s Great Commission to His disciples: “And He said unto them, Go you into all the world, and preach the gospel [of the coming kingdom of God] to every creature. He that believes and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believes not shall be damned” (Mk 16:15-16). Belief without baptism is not sufficient to be saved!

Matthew 28:19-20 also records Christ’s same instruction, but adds some points and excludes others that Mark does not. (This is the same commission, so both accounts must be taken together.) Matthew records, “Go you therefore, and teach all nations…” This had to include teaching the gospel of the kingdom of God because Mark mentioned this. The verse continues, “baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit: Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you.” In His Great Commission to His disciples, the scripture states plainly that Christ commanded baptism!

It is important to note that this scripture explains that baptism is done “in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.” The word “in” should be properly translated “into.” While Acts 2:38 says to be baptized “in the name of Jesus Christ,” Matthew’s account uses the longer phrase. Does scripture contradict itself? Can it be broken or invalidated—sometimes by another scripture? John 10:35 says that it cannot. This is impossible. The Bible never contradicts itself. If it did, it would not be worth the paper it is written on!

Baptizing in Jesus’ name and being baptized into the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are two entirely different points. The first speaks to the issue of authority to baptize on behalf of Christ—one either has or does not have the authority to baptize. The latter speaks to the issue of being baptized into the Family—the Godhead of the Father, Son and (power of the) Holy Spirit. (Though this booklet is not intended to address this issue, it must be noted that this is not referring to the unbiblical doctrine of the trinity, which denies the very meaning of the kingdom of God.) God is a Father who is reproducing Himself—adding many children into His family. He is not “three persons in one,” forming a closed Godhead. The trinity first appeared as a teaching in the great, false “Christian” church in the third century A.D.—centuries after Christ had built His Church. It was imported into the church as a counterfeit to replace the truth that God is expanding His Family. (You may read our free book The Trinity – Is God Three-In-One?)

What is the Right Mode of Baptism?

What is the proper form of baptism? Is it sprinkling, pouring or immersion? Not only must people follow God’s command to be baptized but baptism must be performed in the manner—the method—that God commands. Otherwise, the baptism is invalid. It is as if it had never occurred.

We must ask what the word baptize means. Does it mean to sprinkle? Does it mean to pour? The answer lies in the meaning of the particular Greek word used wherever the words baptism or baptize are found in the New Testament.

First, it is vital to recognize that baptize is actually a Greek word. It is not an English word! The reader is probably aware that the New Testament was written in Greek and translated into English. The word baptize represents a departure from this pattern of the translators in 1611 (when the King James Version of the Bible was translated). When the translators came to the word baptizo, they chose to leave it untranslated as “baptize.” The question of which is the proper method would have been eliminated had they properly translated it into its true meaning: immerse, dip or put into! The English word “pour” derives from the Greek word cheo and “sprinkle” derives from rantidzo.

God chose the word baptizo because He did not want sprinkling or pouring to represent the proper symbol of conversion!

Second, consider the matter in this way. One cannot be immersed by pouring or sprinkling—one can only be poured or sprinkled by pouring and sprinkling. Likewise, one can only be immersed by being immersed. God says what He means and means what He says!

It is no wonder then that when John the Baptist was baptizing people, he chose locations “because there was much water there” (John 3:23). This would not have been necessary for sprinkling or pouring. It is also no wonder that when Philip was baptizing the Ethiopian eunuch it says, “they went down…into the water…and he baptized him. And when they were come up out of the water…” (Acts 8:38-39). This verse does not fit with merely using a little water to sprinkle or pour over a person’s head. Finally, it is also not difficult to see why Matthew 3:16 would record that after Christ was baptized, He “went up straightway out of the water.”

None of these verses are consistent with either sprinkling or pouring. The clear Bible pattern is that baptism requires a lot of water, because people go into it and then come up out of it.