This is part three of a review of the evangelical book, I want to be baptised, by the British author Eric Lane. For part one, go here.

Mr. Lane then proceeds to a discussion of 1 Peter 3:17-22 as a summary of the meaning of water baptism. He teaches:

Baptism is a figure, or illustration of salvation. As such, it is like, the flood which was an old Testament figure of salvation. The word literally is anti-type,. The Old Testament contains a number of types, that is, illustrations or foreshadowings of the saving work that was to be performed by Christ. The fulfillment of one of these in the New Testament is called the anti-type,. Baptism thus teaches us about salvation, especially when viewed in the light of the flood, for they have a common feature, namely, water. (90-91)

The Bible says: "The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ" (1 Peter 3:21, King James Version). The apostle Peter by inspiration taught, "baptism doth also now save us." Mr. Lane claims, "Baptism thus teaches us about salvation." Whom will you believe? Peter states, "baptism doth also now save us." Mr. Lane would have us believe, "baptism doth also not save us." Whom will you believe?

The author of the book contradicts himself. He has baptism being both the figure (type) and the "like figure" ("anti-type"). It can't be both. The Old Testament contains the figures (types) which illustrate the spiritual principles of the New Testament, whereas the New Testament contains the fulfillments ("anti-types") of those figures. (Hebrews 8:1-5) Noah's salvation by water is the figure (type) (1 Peter 3:17-20). Our salvation by water baptism is the fulfillment (anti-type) (1 Peter 3:21-22).

What a beautiful parallel there is between Noah's salvation and ours! Noah was in danger of death (Genesis 6:13,17), and so were we (Romans 3:23; 6:23). God saved Noah (Genesis 7:16), and He saves us (Titus 3:4-5). Noah was saved by grace (Genesis 6:8), and we are too (Ephesians 2:8-9). Noah's salvation was by faith (Hebrews 11:7), and so is ours (Romans 1:16). Noah had to obey God to be saved (Hebrews 11:7; Genesis 6:22; 7:5), and so do we (Hebrews 5:8-9). Noah was saved by water (1 Peter 3:20), and we are saved by water baptism (1 Peter 3:21). As the result Noah was saved (1 Peter 3:20; Hebrews 11:7) and righteous (Genesis 7:1; Hebrews 11:7), and so are we (1 Peter 3:21; Romans 6:17-18).

The author further claims:

For every believer is in Christ who bore the judgment of God and rose to life to bring his people to safety. This is what Peter means by saved through water, - it is through their faith-union with Christ who submitted to the judgment of God for them that believers rise with Christ to eternal security. (92)

Such a muddled misinterpretation of such a clear passage. Is every believer in Christ? As Jesus spoke in the temple, "many believed in Him" (John 8:30). But Jesus denounced these believers, "You are of [your] father the devil, and the desires of your father you want to do" (John 8:44). Were they in Christ? John also records: "Nevertheless even among the rulers many believed in Him, but because of the Pharisees they did not confess [Him], lest they should be put out of the synagogue; for they loved the praise of men more than the praise of God" (John 12:42-43).

Are believers who refuse to confess Christ because they prefer the praise of men to the praise of God in Christ? Even the demons believe in Christ (James 2:19). Are they in Christ? We obtain a "faith-union" with Christ when we are baptized into Him (Galatians 3:26-27). The saved believer is the baptized believer.

Mr. Lane further attempts to explain 1 Peter 3:21:

He might be misinterpreted as preaching baptismal regeneration, - the idea that it is by being baptised and by that alone that we are saved. But Peter denies this - it is not the water that cleanses us, for then only our flesh would be clean (the putting away of the filth of the flesh,). The water of baptism cannot reach our inward being and it is this that needs cleansing. It is our conscience that is defiled and water cannot touch that. (92)

I do not disagree with one thing the author here teaches, but it is all irrelevant to the issue whether or not water baptism is essential to salvation. No, baptism by itself will not save. Baptism is valid only as it is the obedience of faith (Mark 16:16; Romans 1:5). No water cannot touch the inward man, and there is no saving power in the water. The blood of Jesus cleanses the conscience from sin (Hebrews 9:13-14), but the sin cleansing power of that blood is applied to the conscience when our bodies are washed in water (Hebrews 10:21-22).

The author proceeds:

What then is the place of baptism here? Baptism is intended as a sign and outward confession of faith in Christ as the one whose death and resurrection are enough to save the soul. This confession is itself part of the faith through which salvation is received, according to Romans 10:9-10.... To be baptised is to say, I have believed on him. I have come as a sinner and cast myself upon him., One who is in this position has already cleansed his conscience (Hebrews 9:14). (92)

Baptism is in a sense a confession, but Romans 10:9-10 certainly doesn't teach it. The confession of that passage is "with your mouth" (verse 9) and "unto salvation" (verse 10). Now, if baptism were this confession, it certainly would be "unto salvation."

Is it not apparent Mr. Lane is not very careful in his use of Scripture? Is he not twisting the Scriptures to his own destruction and the destruction of those who follow him? (2 Peter 3:16)

The blood of Christ does indeed cleanse us (Hebrews 9:14), but it is when our bodies are washed in water (Hebrews 10:21-22). The death and resurrection of Christ are certainly sufficient for our salvation (Romans 5:9-10), but we are baptized into His death and resurrection (Romans 6:3-4). The only reason for Mr. Lane's faulty reasoning and twisting of Scripture here is his adherence to the false doctrine of salvation by faith alone (James 2:24).

The author concludes on 1 Peter 3:21:

This is exactly what Peter is saying here - baptism is an acknowledgement of the fact that through faith Christ has already cleansed the conscience.... The word for answer, used here has the sense of a response to a demand,. The demand is by the crucified Christ to come to him in faith and then go out and confess him in baptism. (93)

Mr. Lane says "answer" means "a response to a demand." The definition of a word may be substituted for that word without changing the meaning of a sentence. So, let's substitute "response to a demand" for "answer" in 1 Peter 3:21: There is also an antitype which now saves us--baptism (not the removal of the filth of the flesh, but the response to a demand, of a good conscience toward God), through the resurrection of Jesus Christ. (New King James Version) Doesn't make sense does it? Nor does it change the fact that Peter plainly teaches that water baptism does save us.

What does the word "answer" refer to? The New American Standard Version makes it clear: "And corresponding to that, baptism now saves you -- not the removal of dirt from the flesh, but an appeal to God for a good conscience -- through the resurrection of Jesus Christ." Corresponding to Noah's salvation by water, baptism saves us. It's not that there's any soul cleansing power in the water, and it's not because it removes dirt from the body. It's because, by doing what the Lord says to do to be saved, we are appealing to Him to cleanse our conscience from sin. He does this by giving us the benefit of the blood of Christ. The power is in the resurrection of Jesus from the dead, by which He was declared to be the Son of God and enabled to minister His own blood as our High Priest. Thus, in water baptism we call on the name of the Lord, and He forgives our sins (Acts 2:21,37-38).

After all the rhetoric Mr. Lane cleverly employs, the inspired apostle still says, "baptism doth also now save us." Mr. Lane claims, "Baptism thus teaches us about salvation." The apostle still teaches, "baptism doth also now save us." Mr. Lane would have us believe, "baptism doth also not save us." And you must make up your mind whether to believe Holy Scripture or evangelical doctrine.

On Romans 6:3-4 Mr. Lane writes:

Not all would agree that the apostle here makes reference to the subject of water-baptism, for some think he is talking only of Spirit-baptism. There is no question that his main reference is to a spiritual operation, for he is clearly speaking of being baptized into Christ. But why should this exclude any and every reference to water-baptism? Why must it be a case of either-or, and not rather of both-and? The real position surely is that, while he is speaking particularly of spiritual baptism into Christ, he is doing so through the use of the picture of water-baptism. It is almost always the case in the epistles that baptism, means Spirit-baptism, with the word baptism, being used pictorially. This is hardly surprising in view of the stress placed on Spirit-baptism by our Lord in his farewell discourses. He described it as the promise of the Father, (Acts 1:4-5), telling his apostles that after he had departed they should remain in Jerusalem and await the fulfillment of the promise. (93-94)

The promise of the baptism with the Holy Spirit was to the apostles alone (Acts 1:1-5). This baptism of the Holy Spirit was evidenced by speaking in tongues (Acts 2:1-4) and led them into all truth (John 16:13-15). If that's what puts us into Christ, all believers should know all truth and speak in tongues.

Baptism in the name of the Lord, the baptism we must receive for the remission of sins (Acts 2:38), is water baptism (Acts 10:45-48). And there is just one divinely authorized baptism in effect today (Ephesians 4:5). The truth is, there is not a single reference to baptism with the Holy Spirit in any of the New Testament epistles. It is a case of "either-or." There is only one New Testament baptism, not two. And the same word cannot have two meanings in one usage.

Indeed water baptism does picture something. Not our salvation, but the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ. "Therefore we were buried with Him through baptism into death, that just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life." (Romans 6:4). Jesus died on the cross, was buried in the tomb of Joseph of Arimathea and was raised the third day. We die to the love and practice of sin, are buried in water (Thus, baptism is immersion) and are raised to a new life.

Yes, baptism is "into Christ." "Or do you not know that as many of us as were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into His death?" (Romans 6:3) The "death of Christ" and the "blood of Christ" are used synonymously (Romans 5:9-10). Jesus shed His blood in His death. The "shedding of blood" is a reference to death. We are saved by His blood (Matthew 26:28) in that His blood refers to His death in our behalf. But how do we get into His death, that is, reach the benefits of His blood? By being baptized into Him (Romans 6:3). And that baptism is water baptism, the beautiful picture of His death, burial and resurrection.

This is the reason water baptism is in a sense a confession. As we go through a likeness of His death, burial and resurrection, we are confessing that we are putting our trust in that death, burial and resurrection for our salvation. By this simple act of faith we get into Christ (Romans 6:3-4; Galatians 3:26-27), that is, we get into His death, we receive the benefits of His blood.

The author adds:

So when Peter comes to preach the gospel and to call on his hearers to repent and be baptised, he not only assures them of the remission of sins, but also of the gift of the Holy Spirit (Acts 2:38). In support of this he adds: for the promise is unto you and to your children..., (Verse 39). The promise had been declared to them by Christ and they had been commissioned to declare it to others. (94)

It is certain that the "gift of the Holy Spirit" is not baptism with the Holy Spirit, else we have two baptisms in effect. But Mr. Lane is indeed confused. He has sinners saved by Spirit baptism and then confessing their salvation by water baptism. But Peter makes water baptism a condition of receiving the "gift of the Holy Spirit." "Then Peter said to them, "Repent, and let every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit" (Acts 2:38). Mr. Lane puts Spirit baptism before water baptism and equates "the gift of the Holy Spirit" with baptism with the Spirit. Peter places water baptism before the gift of the Holy Spirit. Peter certainly doesn't support Mr. Lane's contention.

Next the author adds,

The word baptise, in relation to Christ's gift of the Spirit is a metaphor for water-baptism. (94).

Now Mr. Lane truly is confused (and confusing). First he had, without proof, water baptism as a metaphor for Spirit baptism. Now he has Spirit baptism as a metaphor for water baptism. Which is it? This is as circular as a dog chasing his tail and no more logical. Above all, there's not one word of Scripture to support it.

Next Mr. Lane goes into a theological discussion:

Indeed, this is the main way in which we learn the theological meaning of baptism from the epistles - from passages dealing with Spirit-baptism. The experience of salvation is spoken of metaphorically by reference to water-baptism. This preserves a very sound evangelical view of the sacraments and is the best safeguard against mechanical views of these institutions. They must not be exalted above the work of salvation itself (which unfortunately happens outside Roman Catholicism as well as inside it). Paul never speaks explicitly about baptism in his epistles and only once about the Lord's Supper. But this does not mean these ordinances are to be undervalued or neglected, for they are used as illustrations of salvation. (96)

Mr. Lane is more concerned with "theological meaning" and an "evangelical view" than he is with obeying the Lord. Else he would not explain away such plain passages. Let us turn way from all human wisdom, whether Catholic or Evangelical, and accept the wisdom of God revealed in Scripture (1 Corinthians 1:18 - 2:13) .

The word "sacrament" is never found in the Bible, nor is the idea there. "Sacrament" is from the Latin "sacramentum," meaning mystery. Of course the term "mystery" is found 27 times in the New Testament. It simply means "a hidden thing, secret." (Thayer, 420) God's plan for human redemption was a mystery (secret) which is now revealed (made known) by the writings of the apostles (Ephesians 3:1-7). The Catholics have seven sacraments, and Protestants recognize two: baptism and the Lord's Supper. But the word "mystery" is never applied in the New Testament to any outward act, whether baptism, the Lord's Supper, or any other.

By "sacrament" Catholics mean "a visible sign instituted by Christ by which grace is conveyed to our souls" (Gibbons, 218). Protestants conceive of sacraments as "ordinances" or "institutions" which "are used as illustrations of salvation." Both are wrong. God demands of us obedience to the faith (Romans 1:5; 16:25-27) in order to be saved. (Hebrews 5:8-9)

It is true that baptism and the Lord's Supper are the only two outward acts we are taught to obey that symbolize something, but neither of them symbolize our salvation. They symbolize what procured our salvation, the sacrifice of Christ for our sins (Romans 6:3-4; 1 Corinthians 11:23-26).

Neither are they properly "mechanical" acts that confers benefit in and of themselves. The sinner is baptized into Christ, into His death (Romans 6:3-4), if he obeys this command "from the heart" (Romans 6:17-18). In the Lord's Supper Christians commune with the blood and body of Christ (1 Corinthians 10:16), as long as we remember what Christ did for us as we partake (1 Corinthians 11:23-26). Otherwise we eat and drink condemnation to ourselves (1 Corinthians 11:27-29). Forget about sacraments and obey the faith.

This matter of sacraments illustrates two problems of the Protestant Reformers. In one respect they over reacted to the Catholic error of salvation by meritorious works (Romans 4:4-7) and went to the opposite error of salvation by faith only (James 2:24). On the other hand, because all the Reformers came out of Catholicism, they retained many Catholic superstitions. This included the belief in sacraments.

The author avers, "Paul never speaks explicitly about baptism in his epistles." Only blind adherence to false doctrine could cause a man who has obviously studied the Scriptures extensively to make such a grossly false statement. What about 1 Corinthians 1:14-16? Is it an explicit reference to water baptism? "I thank God that I baptized none of you except Crispus and Gaius, lest anyone should say that I had baptized in my own name. Yes, I also baptized the household of Stephanas. Besides, I do not know whether I baptized any other." By the way, the apostle makes it quite clear why he was glad he did not personally baptize more: "lest anyone should say that I had baptized in my own name." Paul plainly implies in the context that, to belong to Christ, one must be baptized in His name (verses 11-13). The truth is, there are eight passages in the epistles that explicitly refer to water baptism in the name of Jesus Christ (Romans 6:3-4; 1 Corinthians 1:13-17; 12:13; 15:29; Galatians 3:27; Ephesians 4:5; Colossians 2:12; and 1 Peter 3:21).

Does it exalt faith "above the work of salvation itself" to teach that we gain the benefits of the death of Christ through faith? (Romans 3:21-26) Why does it exalt baptism "above the work of salvation itself" to recognize the scriptural truth that by faith we gain the benefits of the death of Christ when we are baptized into Him? (Romans 6:3-4; Galatians 3:26-27)

Then Mr. Lane teaches:

The second point is the way in which particular individuals come to enjoy what Christ had done once and for all. They do so by faith in him which, if it is true saving faith and not merely mental or historical, and temporary faith, unites them to Christ. (97)

What is "true saving faith"? Faith alone is dead (James 2:17,20,26). Will a dead faith save? To be perfected (made complete), faith must be coupled with works (James 2:22). A disobedient faith will not save (John 8:30,44), but an obedient faith will (Hebrews 11:8). Faith only will not justify (James 2:24), but "faith working through love" will (Galatians 5:6).

On this passage Mr. Lane simply reiterates the arguments previously made.

Please look at the passage. "In Him you were also circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, by putting off the body of the sins of the flesh, by the circumcision of Christ, buried with Him in baptism, in which you also were raised with Him through faith in the working of God, who raised Him from the dead." (Colossians 2:11-12).

Verse eleven compares the forgiveness of sins available in Christ to the fleshly operation of circumcision. As in circumcision, in which the flesh was cut away, Christ performs an operation without hands on our hearts in putting off the body of sins.

Verse twelve explains when the operation takes place. We are buried with Him in baptism (once again demonstrating water baptism is immersion in likeness of His burial) and then raised with Him from that grave.

For this operation to be effective, we must have "faith in the working of God." It's not a mere mechanical act, but the obedience of faith.

Before baptism the body of sins envelopes our hearts. When we in faith are buried with Christ in baptism, He removes the body of sins from our hearts. Then we are raised with Him. To have the body of sins removed from our hearts by Christ, we must be buried with Him in baptism.

Mr. Lane teaches extensive error on the biblical doctrine of imputation, but, since this does not directly pertain to the purpose of baptism, I will refrain from replying to it.

He does comment, "Justification comes about because of spiritual union with Christ" (101). That's precisely correct. He explains this as being "a spiritual process of becoming joined to Christ in such a way that we share in the benefits of his death, burial and resurrection" (102). Amen! And when does that union take place? "For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ" (Galatians 3:27) .

Of course, Mr. Lane tries to explain this away as just a metaphorical reference to baptism. He contends baptism is just a sign of the believer's adoption and justification. These dodges have already been repeatedly answered. The truth is, water baptism stands between the sinner and entrance into Christ, where we are justified and become God's children.

_________________________

Works Cited

Gibbons, John Cardinal, The Faith of Our Fathers.
Thayer, J.H., A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament.

TOP OF PAGE

BACK TO MAIN PAGE

Online Bible Course

Article Archive
- Articles by Date
- Articles by Subject

Audio Sermons

Debates & Discussions

Free Bible to Download

Events

About Us

How to Find Us & When We Meet

Want to Study the Bible with Us?

Want to take our Free Bible Correspondence Course by Mail?