How Some People Just Will Not Accept The Obvious
There is a statement of Jesus that is so plain, and yet so controversial that you rarely hear it referred to by denominational preachers, whether it be in their churches or on TV or the radio. That when they do, they feel it necessary to give an explanation that goes against the clear statement of Jesus. I have reference to the words of Jesus as found in Mark 16:16...
"He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned"
To illustrate what I said earlier, let's take a look at four different views of this verse as taught by men, and then contrast those views with the one plainly stated by Jesus and supported by His apostles in their teaching and preaching...
The first view is one held by those who do not profess to be Christians, but for the purpose of our lesson should be considered. In essence, they would say, "he who believes and is baptized `will not' be saved." Two separate groups hold this view.
Atheists - who do not believe in God, heaven or hell, or salvation of any kind.
Jews, Muslims, Hindus, etc., who believe in God (or gods), but who do not believe that salvation is to be found in Jesus and that to believe and/or be baptized is contrary to the will of God.
But those who accept Jesus and the authority of His apostles reject such a view. There is a God who offers salvation (contrary to the views of atheists) - 1 Ti 2:3-4 "This is good, and it is pleasing in the sight of God our Savior, who desires all people to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth." Salvation does come only through Jesus (contrary to the Jews, Muslims, Hindus, etc.) - 1 Ti 2:5-6 "For there is one God, and there is one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, who gave himself as a ransom for all, which is the testimony given at the proper time."; Jn 14:6 "Jesus said to him, "I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me."
Though I doubt any at present actually hold to this view, there are some who do, and it only begins to illustrate how some are willing to deny the plain statement of Jesus.
Consider a second view, "he who `does not believe' and `is not baptized' will be saved. This view is held by "Universalist", who believe that God will save everyone eventually. To support their view, they will isolate some verses like 1 Ti 2:6 "who gave himself as a ransom for all, which is the testimony given at the proper time." But those who know the teachings of Christ and Paul likewise reject such a view. Jesus Himself told that there would be few who would be saved - Mt 7:13-14 `"Enter by the narrow gate. For the gate is wide and the way is easy that leads to destruction, and those who enter by it are many. For the gate is narrow and the way is hard that leads to life, and those who find it are few." Paul warned of those who would not be saved, but face the wrath of God - Ep 5:5-6 "For you may be sure of this, that everyone who is sexually immoral or impure, or who is covetous (that is, an idolater), has no inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and God. Let no one deceive you with empty words, for because of these things the wrath of God comes upon the sons of disobedience."
Most "Bible-believing, professing Christians" would never treat Mark 16:16 the way the first two views do. But as we consider two more views, we may start hitting closer to "home". But please understand...that we do so, desiring to "speak the truth in love"; and we pray that your love for the truth is such that you are willing to seriously consider what follows (see for example Ac 17:11). The third "view" then is "he who `does not believe' and `is baptized' will be saved." This view is held by most who practice "infant baptism." By "baptizing" (actually sprinkling, not immersing) infants incapable of faith they (esp. Catholics) indicate that faith is not essential to salvation. Some (esp. Lutherans) try to get around this by saying that God imparts saving faith to the infant so baptism can still save. By sprinkling or pouring instead of immersion, they also indicate Jesus did not mean what He said (the reason "baptized" above is in quotes).
Speaking the truth in love, we must point out that faith is a necessary prerequisite...
1.) For baptism - Ac 8:35-37 "As they were going along the road, they came to some water. The eunuch said, "Look, there's some water. What keeps me from being baptized?" Philip said, "If you believe with all your heart, you may." He replied, "I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God." So he ordered the chariot to stop, and Philip and the eunuch both went down into the water, and Philip baptized him."
2.) For salvation - Ro 10:9-10 "because, if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. For with the heart one believes and is justified, and with the mouth one confesses and is saved."
Sprinkling or pouring is NOT Bible baptism. The Greek word used in the Bible is "baptizo", and it means "to immerse". This is why baptism is described in the Bible as a "burial" - Ro 6:3-4 "Do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? We were buried therefore with him by baptism into death, in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, we too might walk in newness of life."; Co 2:12 "having been buried with him in baptism, in which you were also raised with him through faith in the powerful working of God, who raised him from the dead." Sprinkling or pouring was substituted in the place of baptism (immersion) hundreds of years after Christ and His apostles. By keeping the "tradition of men" by sprinkling or pouring, we fail to keep the command of God" concerning baptism - note Jesus' condemnation of displacing God's commands by traditions of men, Mt 15:3-9 "He answered them, "And why do you break the commandment of God for the sake of your tradition? For God commanded, 'Honor your father and your mother,' and, 'Whoever reviles father or mother must surely die.' But you say, 'If anyone tells his father or his mother, What you would have gained from me is given to God, he need not honor his father.' So for the sake of your tradition you have made void the word of God. You hypocrites! Well did Isaiah prophesy of you, when he said: "'This people honors me with their lips, but their heart is far from me; in vain do they worship me, teaching as doctrines the commandments of men.'" Therefore, baptizing infants is without scriptural precedent. There are no commands or examples of infant baptism. Since the prerequisites of faith (Mk 16:16; Ac 8:37) and repentance (Ac 2:38;17:30) are beyond the infant's capability, they are not suitable candidates for baptism. I am confident that those who hold to the view of sprinkling infants are honest and sincere. But despite their honest sincerity, they are just as guilty of twisting the words of Jesus as are the atheists, unbelieving Jews (Muslims, Hindus, etc.) and the universalists.
But there is another view sincerely held by many, and that is, "he who believes and `is not baptized' will be saved". This view is held by those who believe in salvation by faith "only". That one is saved before baptism. That baptism is not essential to salvation -- This view is held for all practical purposes by most members of various denominations.
Having looked at four views of Mark 16:16 we will further examine these views looking for harmony the words of Jesus in our next segment of this lesson.
