The Highway Forums General Discussion Theology Discussion Forum "We sometimes allow children to die unbaptized. ."

speratus said:
Could Paul have been saved before, at, or after baptism? Yes. Do we have scriptural warrant to make the assumption he was saved before baptism? I don't think so. Not everyone who sees visions, obeys a command, calls Jesus "Lord", is called a "brother", etc. is saved. I'll leave you to research the revelant texts that prove my point.

If I hadn't researched the relevant texts, I wouldn't have made the comments I have.

The text you provided is ample evidence that Paul was saved prior to his baptism.

But regardless of the matter of "when", the fact remains that saving grace is NOT dispensed in, by or through baptism. J_Edwards has said so many times, as I have as well, baptism is a "sign" and a "seal" but it has no power to save. Your semi-Romanism doesn't cut it.

Could Paul have been saved before, at, or after baptism? Yes. Do we have scriptural warrant to make the assumption he was saved before baptism? I don't think so. Not everyone who sees visions, obeys a command, calls Jesus "Lord", is called a "brother", etc. is saved. I'll leave you to research the revelant texts that prove my point.

What we do know is that he was saved when it pleased God (Gal. 1:15, 16) and that his sins; past, present, and future; were washed away in baptism (Acts 22:16).

J_Edwards said:

First, baptism was so important to Paul, because it was saving so many people, that he said, “for Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel” and “I determined not to know any thing among you, save Jesus Christ, and him crucified” (1 Cor 1:17, 2:2) <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/drop.gif" alt="" />

Second, was it not Paul that said; “Therefore if any man be in Christ (not in the baptismal waters), he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new. And all things are of God, who hath reconciled us to himself by Jesus Christ, and hath given to us the ministry of reconciliation; To wit, that God was in Christ (not in the baptismal waters), reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word (not the waters) of reconciliation (2 Cor 5:17-19).

Without the spoken word of the gospel, there is no baptism. The priority given to preaching, in no way, devalues Baptism as a means of grace.

Through the word of reconciliation in preaching and baptism, God imputes to us the righteousness that we could not obtain for ourselves through any work, merit, prayer or resident change.

"The two participles are substantivized and describe the person that shall be saved ("believeth" and "baptized," dm)" comments R. C. H. Lenski, Interpretation of St. Mark's Gospel, pg. 765). "'Believeth' and 'baptized' are aorists," Lenski continues (by aorists, Lenski means denote single acts, dm). "Both verbs have forward or anticipated fulfillment (goal). This goal to be obtained is 'salvation.'" (Ibid., pg. 766).

For in the Sacraments God alone properly acts; men bring nothing of their own, but approach to receive the grace offered to them.  Thus, in Baptism, God washed us by the blood of his Son and regenerated us by his Spirit; in the Supper he feeds us with the flesh and blood of Christ.  What part of the work can man claim, without blasphemy, since the whole appears to be of grace?  The fact of the administration being committed to men, derogates no more from the operation of God than the hand does from the artificer, since God alone acts by them, and does the whole. .

Speratur quotes,

"The two participles are substantivized and describe the person that shall be saved ("believeth" and "baptized," dm)" comments R. C. H. Lenski, Interpretation of St. Mark's Gospel, pg. 765). "'Believeth' and 'baptized' are aorists," Lenski continues (by aorists, Lenski means denote single acts, dm). "Both verbs have forward or anticipated fulfillment (goal). This goal to be obtained is 'salvation.'" (Ibid., pg. 766).

The word “believeth” is an aorist participle referring to one who has believed at some time in the past. Also, the Greek term for baptized is translated “is baptized,” is an aorist participle but in the passive voice. This form refers to an act of outward obedience, in this case, baptism. Therefore, the correct translation here should be stated, “He who believed and who was baptized shall be saved.” However, the Lord adds, “. . . but he that believeth not shall be damned.” It should be noted that this negative statement does not include a reference to baptism, making it clear that what saves a person is living faith in Jesus Christ. This is made clear in Ephesians 2:8, “For by grace are ye saved through faith. . . .” The word “saved” is a perfect passive participle. It means that this salvation took place at some point in the past and is continuing on in the present, being accomplished by Jesus Christ Himself. If baptism were necessary for salvation, Ephesians 2:8 and many others verses should have been translated “ye are saved through faith and baptism.” (Spiros Zodhiates).

The omission of baptized with “disbelieveth” would seem to show that Jesus does not make baptism essential to salvation. Condemnation rests on disbelief, not on baptism. So salvation rests on belief. (A.T. Robertson).

Mark 16:16: “He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.” The negative proposition in this declaration is the clue to its interpretation. Christ, in these words, expresses succinctly and with amazing accuracy the exact relation that baptism bears to saving faith. The outward symbol is enjoined with no equivocation, and yet no saving value is placed upon it, for the negative proposition conditions damnation solely upon the failure to believe. The failure to be baptized does not condemn, according to the divine estimate. Now, if baptism were essential to salvation the statement would be incomplete. (Dallas Theological Seminary. Bibliotheca Sacra Volume 99, Vol. 99, Page 102, Dallas Theological Seminary, 1942; 2002.)

Before He ascended Jesus told the disciples, “Go into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature. He who believes and is baptized will be saved; and he who does not believe will be condemned” (Mark 16:15–16). Does not this passage teach that water baptism is necessary for salvation?

The answer is “no,” which several observations demonstrate. In the first place, belief, not baptism, is the critical issue in this passage. The passage says that if you do not believe you will be condemned; it does not say if you do not believe and are not baptized you will be condemned. Obviously, then, the issue is faith.

Perhaps more importantly, it should be pointed out that this passage does not say, “be baptized to be saved,” nor does it say, “if you are not baptized you cannot be saved.” Neither does it discuss believing and not being baptized. Therefore, one cannot say that this passage demands baptism for salvation. In other words, given the two items of belief and baptism there are only four possibilities:

• 1. Believe and be baptized ….. Salvation
• 2. Believe and not be baptized …. Not discussed
• 3. not believe and be baptized ….. implied, but not discussed
• 4. not believe and not be baptized ….. condemnation

Since this passage does not discuss the possibility of believing and not being baptized, it cannot be said that this passage teaches that baptism is necessary for salvation. To say the passage teaches that one must be baptized to be saved is to add to the passage. The apostle John gave a stern warning against doing such a thing (Revelation 22:18).

How does one then explain the statement, “He who is saved and is baptized will be saved?” The point, as Matthew 28:19 confirms, is that baptism is a part of the great commission. As has been pointed out, Mark 16:16 does not say “be baptized in order to be saved”; it says “he who believes and is baptized.” It is like saying he who gets on a bus and sits down will go to New York. That does not mean that one must sit down in order to get to New York. Technically, all that is necessary to get to New York is to get on the bus. Likewise, as we have seen, the critical issue in Mark 16 is faith. All a person has to do to get to heaven is trust Christ. This means one may believe, be baptized, and get to heaven, or one may believe and not be baptized and still get to heaven. What this passage definitely does not teach is that one must be baptized to receive God’s forgiveness. (Chafer Theological Seminary. Chafer Theological Seminary Journal Volume 3, Vol. 3, Page 9-10, Chafer Theological Seminary, 1997; 2002).

Speratus kindly remarks,

Your Zwinglian view that baptism is a work of man is refuted by Calvin. The Auburn Street Presbyterian Church quotes the "Antidote to Trent":

BAPTISM is the initiatory sign by which we are admitted to the fellowship of the Church, that being ingrafted into Christ we may be accounted children of God.

It is now clear how false the doctrine is which some long ago taught, and others still persist in, that by baptism we are exempted and set free from original sin, and from the corruption which was propagated by Adam to all his posterity, and that we are restored to the same righteousness and purity of nature which Adam would have had if he had maintained the integrity in which he was created. This class of teachers never understand what is meant by original sin, original righteousness, or the grace of baptism. Now, it has been previously shown (Book 2 chap. 1 sec. 8), that original sin is the depravity and corruption of our nature, which first makes us liable to the wrath of God, and then produces in us works which Scripture terms the works of the flesh (Gal. 5:19).

The two things, therefore, must be distinctly observed—viz. that we are vitiated and perverted in all parts of our nature, and then, on account of this corruption, are justly held to be condemned and convicted before God, to whom nothing is acceptable but purity, innocence, and righteousness. And hence, even infants bring their condemnation with them from their mother’s womb; for although they have not yet brought forth the fruits of their unrighteousness, they have its seed included in them. Nay, their whole nature is, as it were, a seed of sin, and, therefore, cannot but be odious and abominable to God. (Institutes of the Christian Religion; IV, xv, 10).

(Genesis 17:7) In virtue of this promise they are admitted to baptism, because they are considered members of the Church. Their salvation, therefore, has not its commencement in baptism, but being already founded on the word, is sealed by baptism.

Moreover, how frivolous and nugatory the division of causes enumerated by them is, I omit to show, except that I neither can nor ought to let pass the very great absurdity of calling Baptism alone the instrumental cause. What then will become of the gospel? Will it not even be allowed to occupy the smallest corner? But baptism is the sacrament of faith. Who denies it? Yet, when all has been said, it must still be granted me that it is nothing else than an appendage of the gospel. They, therefore, act preposterously in assigning it the first place, and act just as any one who should call a mason’s trowel the instrumental cause of a house! Unquestionably, whosoever postponing the gospel enumerates baptism among the causes of salvation, by so doing gives proof that he knows not what baptism is, what its force, its office, or its use.

J_Edwards said:
Second, did you know that Calvin also wrote;

Of course we don’t even have to go that far, for “if” you had read the entire Antidote to the Sixth Session of the Council of Trent on the Doctrine of Justification (1547) (located here at The Highway <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />) you would have seen and hopefully understood things more clearly;

I don't understand how Calvin can call baptism an appendage of the gospel and also a work of God.

Are not all the works of God in the gospel saving and necessary to salvation?

Meaning: 1) to save, keep safe and sound, to rescue from danger or destruction 1a) one (from injury or peril) 1a1) to save a suffering one (from perishing), i.e. one suffering from disease, to make well, heal, restore to health 1b1) to preserve one who is in danger of destruction, to save or rescue 1b) to save in the technical biblical sense 1b1) negatively 1b1a) to deliver from the penalties of the Messianic judgment 1b1b) to save from the evils which obstruct the reception of the Messianic deliverance.

Meaning: 1) deliverance, preservation, safety, salvation 1a) deliverance from the molestation of enemies 1b) in an ethical sense, that which concludes to the souls safety or salvation 1b1) of Messianic salvation 2) salvation as the present possession of all true Christians 3) future salvation, the sum of benefits and blessings which the Christians, redeemed from all earthly ills, will enjoy after the visible return of Christ from heaven in the consummated and eternal kingdom of God.

J_Edwards said:
This is very simple. Baptism is a work of man. Man is the one that does the baptism-he literally does the sprinkling, etc. (don't confuse water baptism with Spirit baptism). The subject submits to being baptized. Baptism is a work of man. However, Calvin calls it "a work of God" in that God administers grace because of obedience to His covenant.

However, this is not "saving grace" for then baptism (a work of man) would violate Eph 2:8-9 and other texts. Salvation then would partly be a work of man and man could not longer said to be regenerated by the Holy Spirit alone and thus have root in himself to claim he saved himself.

I take it your definition of "grace" is not unmerited favor but favor granted because of obediance to His covenant? How is the merit associated with the administration of baptism (e.g., sprinkling, etc.) transferred to the person being baptized? Does an infant also perform a meritorious work by submitting to baptism?

Does man sin in all his works? If so, does not man's work of baptism increase his condemnation under the law? And, if baptism only increases man's condemnation, how can baptism be saving under any definition?

J_Edwards said:

Your view of baptism is most closely akin to Sacerdotalism. This is the view of the RCC. They expand the capacity of the sacraments to include the actual conveying of the blessing signified. The seal develops into not only a certification, but an actual imparting of the things being sealed. In his systematic, C. Hodge explains, According to the Romanists, therefore, a sacrament is a divine ordinance which has the inherent or intrinsic power of conferring the grace which it signifies. For a more lengthy discussion of the error of Sacerdotalism, see B. B. Warfield's The Plan of Salvation.

It has been the boast of Lutheranism that it represents, in distinction from Calvinism, a "conservative " (63) reformation. The boast is justified, as on other grounds, so also on this, that it has incorporated into its confessional system the essence of the sacerdotalism which characterized the teaching of the old Church. Confessional Lutheranism, like Romanism, teaches that the grace of salvation is conveyed to men in the means of grace, otherwise not. But it makes certain modifications in the sacerdotal teaching which it took over from the old Church, and these modifications are of such a far-reaching character as to transform the whole system. We do not commonly hear in Lutheran sacerdotalism much of "the Church," which is the very cor cordis of Roman sacerdotalism: what we hear of instead is "the means of grace." Among these means of grace" the main stress is not laid upon the sacraments, but on "the Word," which is defined as the chief "means of grace." And the means of grace are not represented as acting ex opere operato but it is constantly declared that they are effective only to faith. I do not say the scheme is a consistent one: in point of fact it is honeycombed with inconsistencies. But it remains sufficiently sacerdotal to confine the activities of saving grace to the means of grace, that is to say, to the Word and sacraments, and thus to interpose the means of grace between the sinner and his God.

The central evil of sacerdotalism is therefore present in this scheme in its full manifestation, and wherever it is fully operative we find men exalting the means of grace and more or less forgetting the true agent of all gracious operations, the Holy Spirit himself, in their absorption with the instrumentalities through which alone he is supposed to work. It is in a truly religious interest, therefore, that the Reformed, as over against the Lutherans, insist with energy that, important as are the means of grace, and honored as they must be by us because honored by God the Holy Spirit as the instruments by and through which he works grace in the hearts of men, yet after all the grace which he works by and through them he works himself not out of them but immediately out of himself, extrinsecus accedens.

Speratus suggests,

Is Warfield seriously suggesting the unregenerate sinner can approach God without being called through the ministry of the Word?

The central evil of sacerdotalism is therefore present in this scheme in its full manifestation, and wherever it is fully operative we find men exalting the means of grace and more or less forgetting the true agent of all gracious operations, the Holy Spirit himself, in their absorption with the instrumentalities through which alone he is supposed to work.

There are three aspects of the working of the sacerdotal system which must be kept clearly in view, if we wish to appraise with any accuracy the injury to the religious interests which it inevitably works.

In the first place, the sacerdotal system separates the soul from direct contact with and immediate dependence upon God the Holy Spirit as the source of all its gracious activities. It interposes between the soul and the source of all grace a body of instrumentalities, on which it tempts it to depend; and it thus betrays the soul into a mechanical conception of salvation.

In the second place, sacerdotalism deals with God the Holy Spirit, the source of all grace, in utter neglect of his personality, as if he were a natural force, operating, not when and where and how he pleases, but uniformly and regularly wherever his activities are released.

And this obviously involves, in the third place, the subjection of the Holy Spirit in his gracious operations to the control of men. Instead of the Church and the sacraments, the means of grace, being conceived, as they are represented in the Scriptures, and as they must be thought of in all healthful religious conceptions of them, as instrumentalities which the Holy Spirit uses in working salvation, the Holy Spirit is made an instrument which the Church, the means of grace, use in working salvation.

Article V: That we may obtain this faith, the Ministry of Teaching the Gospel and administering the Sacraments was instituted. For through the Word and Sacraments, as through instruments, the Holy Ghost is given, who works faith; where and when it pleases God, in them that hear the Gospel, to wit, that God, not for our own merits, but for Christ's sake, justifies those who believe that they are received into grace for Christ's sake.

Q. What does Baptism give? What good is it?

A. It gives the forgiveness of sins, redeems from death and the Devil, gives eternal salvation to all who believe this, just as God's words and promises declare.

Q. How can water do such great things?

A. Water doesn't make these things happen, of course. It is God's Word, which is with and in the water. Because, without God's Word, the water is plain water and not baptism. But with God's Word it is a Baptism, a grace-filled water of life, a bath of new birth in the Holy Spirit ,..

J_Edwards said:
Warfield stated;

His statement is proven, not disproved by the Augsburg Confession when we read such things as;

To obtain such faith God instituted the office of the ministry, that is, provided the Gospel and the sacraments. Through these, as through means, he gives the Holy Spirit, who works faith, when and where he pleases in those who hear the Gospel. And the Gospel teaches that we have a gracious God, not by our own merits but by the merit of Christ, when we believe this.
Condemned are the Anabaptists and others who teach that the Holy Spirit comes to us through our own preparations, thoughts, and works without the external word of the Gospel.

It is simply salvation by works—the works of man, not God, though done in God’s name! VERY much like the false, “Name It, Claim It, Frame It,” doctrine of many, the Lutheran Church has the, “Baptize It, Utilize It, Exercise It,” doctrine of the church. That is when Lutherans “baptize,” they believe they “utilize” the Holy Spirit (an instrument of their cause), and thereby “exercise” out sin and redeem the sinner from the Devil, which gives eternal salvation. God becomes a manipulated secondary cause of salvation and not the primary cause! This is not salvation by grace alone! Thus, once again, I must make a plea for your soul Speratus, for your salvation is resting in the works of men and your Church and not in the very person of Jesus Christ alone!

Let's use the English translation of the German. The German is considered more official than the Latin version (The Book of Concord, Tappert, p. 24) and it more clearly identifies who is doing the action.


Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

To obtain such faith God instituted the office of the ministry, that is, provided the Gospel and the sacraments. Through these, as through means, he gives the Holy Spirit, who works faith, when and where he pleases in those who hear the Gospel. And the Gospel teaches that we have a gracious God, not by our own merits but by the merit of Christ, when we believe this.