Is Water Baptism Necessary for Salvation?

Having grown up in the Christian Churches and Churches of Christ, for us the short answer is yes. This is what we teach. Acts 2:38 is one of our battle cries. But I want to take a closer look at this in this piece. Is what my church teaches really right?

The Arguments of the Christian Churches and Churches of Christ

“…Men and brethren, what shall we do? Then Peter said unto them, 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.” Acts 2:37-38 (KJV)

I do believe that just because Peter is instructing them to be baptized, that it doesn’t necessarily mean that it is necessary for salvation. It is not like as if they asked, “What MUST I do to be saved?” as the Philippian jailer did in Acts 16:30. But it does seem incorrect to include “and be baptized” in the sentence if at least one of the purposes of it isn’t the remission of sins.

The clause “…ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost” is in a separate sentence in all English versions that I know of, so this would seem to leave open the question of whether baptism is necessary for the receiving of the Holy Spirit, which is the other major claim that the CCs and C of Cs make of this verse. Acts 10:44-48 is a clear counterexample of this claim. In Acts 19:6, the believers being baptized didn’t receive the Holy Spirit until after Paul laid his hands on them which was after they had been baptized. So there seems to be no “rule” about this.

Another verse that is used this one:

“Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.” John 3:5 (KJV)

My only comment on this is that I just can’t say for sure that the water that Jesus is speaking of the water of baptism or something else such as amniotic fluid. But the latter explanation would imply that there will be no unborn babies in heaven. (But so would saying that baptism is necessary for salvation without exception.) But I will save the discussion of the topic of salvation for infants and young children for another time.

“…the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water. The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us…” 1 Peter 3:20-21 (KJV)

This verse clearly says that baptism does save. The only alternative explanation that I have ever heard is that the “baptism” here isn’t water baptism. But Ephesians 4:5 says that there is only one baptism. Therefore, I reject this argument. However, nothing in this passage says that it is impossible for someone to be saved without water baptism.

The Arguments of the Other Side

The most common objection to the doctrine of the necessity of baptism for salvation is the idea that this would be “salvation by works” which is thoroughly denounced in the NT (e.g. Ephesians 2:8). But is preaching the gospel a work? Aren’t some people saved because of the preaching of the gospel? “But the one who is being saved isn’t the one doing the work (the preaching),” you might object. Ah! That’s just it. The one who is being saved isn’t the one doing the work of baptism either. You don’t baptize yourself; someone else always has to do the baptizing! All you have to “do” is come forward and say you will, which is just like the rest of the plan of salvation. See also Titus 3:5.

The other arguments involve counterexamples. The most common one is the thief on the cross (see Luke 23:39-43). This opens up various tired old arguments like “When did the New Covenant actually begin?” Of course, the CCs and C of Cs will argue that it was later (at the Resurrection or even the Day of Pentecost), and the other side argues that it was at the moment of Christ’s death. (Jesus died before the thief did, so the argument goes that the thief would have been under the New Covenant at the time of his death.) There are passages of scripture which indicate that the Resurrection of Christ and belief therein is necessary for salvation, and this gives weight to the CC and C of C argument. But I kind of see that the OT and NT overlap and you can’t say everything changed over at one instant. I like to keep myself open-minded about such things. Some CC and C of C Christians will even say that the thief could have been baptized previously, but even if that were true, that would have been John’s baptism. (Acts 19:3-5 indicates that baptism into Christ in New Testament is apparently necessary even for those who already had John’s baptism. This doesn’t contradict Ephesians 4:5 because John’s baptism had passed away.)

The other counterexample that I can see in the NT is the one I mentioned previously in Acts 10:44-48. Surely if some people had received the Holy Ghost, then they also had to be saved at that time.

A Closer Look at What CC and C of C Christians Really Believe

Many of us would NOT agree the following statement:

There is no way that anyone can be saved without water baptism. There are no exceptions.

Though there are some who would. My Bible study teacher told us a story of a man who, on his death bed, wanted to be baptized. There was a bathtub there, and some men tried to get him to it, but he died before they could make it. My Bible study teacher says he thinks that that man was saved. He uses passages (e.g. Matthew 5:22, 28) which say that doing something “in your heart” is equivalent to the physical act. However, he still criticizes the Baptists for not believing that baptism is not necessary for salvation.

We do not believe in infant baptism. The reason why baptism saves is because it is “the answer of a good conscience toward God” (1 Peter 3:21, KJV). This cannot be done by an infant.

Also, baptism must be done by immersion, not sprinkling or pouring. This is because of the meaning of the Greek word and it is also brought out explicitly in some passages. I believe that there shouldn’t even be a word “baptism”. It should be rendered “immersion” in the Bible. Here is a link to some arguments and positions of the noninstrumental C of C.

Conclusion

We cannot tie God’s hands and say that He will never save someone without first having been immersed. But on the other hand, to say that baptism has nothing to do with salvation is, I believe, incorrect. But unlike some in my church, I can consider those who disagree with me on this issue to be my brothers and sisters in Christ as long as they teach that adult baptism by immersion is commanded in scripture. The idea of keeping out “works salvation” doctrine is a legitimate concern. But I don’t think there should be a denominational division over this “necessity” part of the issue. The CC and C of C Christians should stop accusing the Baptists and others of “leaving something out of the plan of salvation”. And they should not accuse us of teaching “salvation by works”.