Originally posted by Jarlaxle:
I was born and raised in a Church of Christ. Actually I still attend a Church of Christ. However, I no longer believe many of their legalistic views on theology. I would argue with Baptists about whether baptism was essential for salvation or not and I had convinced myself that I was correct. After all, many verses strongly imply that baptism is the point where sins are forgiven. It is my view now that Baptists do not put enough importance on Baptism, while the Church of Christ puts way too much importance on it.
I offer an analogy to try and demonstrate the importance of baptism without making it so important that one would get the idea that it was essential for the forgiveness of sins.
Baptism is to becoming a Christian what a ring is to becoming married in my culture (USA).
The ring is not essential for me to get married, yet I would not have dared to have gone through the ceremony without it when I got married. To put baptism off until a later “convenient” date is like going through a marriage ceremony and then purchasing the rings later. Certainly there are circumstances in real life where a couple will get married without them (i.e. can not afford them or something), but those are not the circumstances I am comparing baptism to. I am comparing baptism to the general or normal union of man and wife in my culture.
When I placed the ring on my wife’s finger, I made a pledge to her while doing so.
1 Peter 3:21 “and this water symbolizes baptism that now saves you also--not the removal of dirt from the body but the pledge of a good conscience toward God. It saves you by the resurrection of Jesus Christ,”
My Church of Christ brothers would of course say, “Now see? Its right there in black and white. Baptism saves you!” Well, ya, their correct, but what exactly is Peter saying baptism is? Peter says there are two parts of baptism. The physical water washing part, and the pledge part. Kinda like the ring and vow I made at my wedding. The physical ring symbolizing my “endless love” and the vow or “pledge of a good conscience toward her.” Is the ring essential? In her eyes it may have been, but technically speaking my vow is all that matters. If not, then I had better hope the ring never gets lost!
Likewise, Peter says that removal of dirt is not the part that saves. The part that saves is the pledge of a good conscience toward God. With this analogy in mind, lets look at a verse by Paul that is often referred to by “Church of Christers.”
Romans 6:3-4 Or don't you know that all of us who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? We were therefore buried with him through baptism into death in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, we too may live a new life.
This would be like saying, “Or don’t you know that all of you who have had wedding rings placed upon your fingers have been engaged in a relationship of endless love? You were therefore joined together by these rings in the holy matrimony.” Worded this way, it makes is sound as if the rings are essential for a couple to be bound together, when in fact it is not. So even though many verses in the Bible imply that baptism (removal of dirt from the body part) is essential, it is in fact not so because Peter says that part is NOT the part that saves.
In my opinion, this is a good analogy but I believe that the dunking part of baptism is even more critical or important to becoming a Christian that the rings are to becoming married. I don’t think it is essential in the sense that it actually cleanses you of sin, only the pledge of a good conscience can do that by the resurrection of Jesus. But, just as I would not dare delay in getting a ring for my bride, even more so I would not dare delay getting baptized to become “engaged” with my Savior. What else would explain why seemingly each case in the Bible where people were baptized they did not delay?
Hope this helps,
Jarlaxle
