This was a really good and in-depth article, and I think you made a convincing biblical and historical case that baptism does indeed save. I was raised Baptist, but have recently changed my views on baptism due to the research I have done, and decided to become Presbyterian. Although I am incredibly thankful for the values instilled in me from my Baptist upbringing, this experience of changing denominations has been overwhelmingly positive, and I have learned a lot about church history, theology, and biblical interpretation.
By the way, baptism is an action, something you do. It is a method or work. Trying to work your way into heaven by getting baptism is not scriptural. It’s false teaching and far from orthodox.
Well then “that side” of the denomination is teaching heresy.
You claim you have Merit to enter heaven. You have no merit!
Ephesians 2:8–9 (ESV):
“For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast.
Titus 3:5 (ESV)
“He saved us, not because of works done by us in righteousness, but according to his own mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewal of the Holy Spirit.”
• Romans 11:6 (ESV)
“But if it is by grace, it is no longer on the basis of works; otherwise grace would no longer be grace.”
The father of the Presbyterian Church is widely considered to be John Calvin (1509–1564)
Calvin did not believe that baptism, by itself, saves. He taught that baptism is a means of grace, but only effective when joined with true faith. In other words, baptism is not magical or salvific on its own; it is a sign and seal of God’s promises, which become effective through the work of the Holy Spirit in the believer.
So, I don’t know if you are talking about some random off branch of Presbyterians, I know they belief in pedo baptism, but they DO NOT affirm baptism saves. That’s heresy dear friend.
Baptism is a necessary part of the Christian life, but it does not cause salvation. The grace of God brings salvation, and baptism is a sign of that grace—not a substitute for it.”
— Sproul, paraphrased from lectures and Truths We Confess (one the greatest Presbyterian brothers)
"And so we utterly condemn the vanity of those who affirm the sacraments to be nothing else than naked and bare signs. No, we assuredly believe that by Baptism we are engrafted into Christ Jesus, to be made partakers of His righteousness, by which our sins are covered and remitted... Therefore, if anyone slanders us by saying that we affirm or believe the sacraments to be symbols and nothing more, they are libellous and speak against the plain facts."
Take note here. That you had to rely on the mind of a man to come up with an idea that baptism helps save and renew the heart. You cannot quote scripture and come up with the same conclusion. I have taught bad doctrine before also, it’ll get better.
"Am I now trying to win the approval of human beings [such as R. C Sproul], or of God? Or am I trying to please people? If I were still trying to please people, I would not be a servant of Christ."
— Galatians 1:10
And btw, R. C. Sproul was not a good representative of Reformed theology. Presbyterians do believe that baptism saves.
The cleansing of sin, or expiation, is the act of God by which sin is removed, resulting in the absolution of guilt and the restoration of fellowship with Him. Through expiation, accomplished by Christ’s atoning work, man is reconciled to God, as the wall of sin is removed. Another term for expiation is the "remission of sins," which Scripture closely associates with baptism (Acts 2:38; 22:16).
This is problematic if it’s implying that baptism itself is the means by which sins are expiated or removed—as if the water cleanses sin rather than Christ’s blood. That’s not consistent with the broader teaching of Scripture.
The cleansing of sin, or expiation, is the act of God by which sin is removed through the atoning death of Jesus Christ. This results in the absolution of guilt and restoration of fellowship with God. Through faith in Christ, man is reconciled to God, as the barrier of sin is taken away. Baptism, while not the means of salvation, is the outward sign of this inward cleansing and is closely associated with the believer’s public identification with Christ and His saving work (Acts 2:38; Romans 6:3–4).
Tyler, it seems to me that you did not read the whole article, or perhaps that you skimmed important parts of it. That can be forgiven because it is rather long and tedious. But if you are going to make claims about what I think without reading/understanding my work, that becomes a problem.
For example, you say that "baptism is an action, something you do. It is a method or work. Trying to work your way into heaven by getting baptism is not scriptural. It’s false teaching and far from orthodox." I clearly refute that in my article. Maybe you disagree with me, but you don't deal with my argument—you just state the point again. If you read my article, you'll see clearly that there is strong Scriptural proof that baptism is not meritorious, much like faith is not meritorious but still required for salvation.
Interestingly, you get upset at Rachel for using the Scot's Confession because it is the "words of man" while quoting Sproul and relying on Calvin.
Oh, and yes, Calvin did hold to Baptismal Regeneration:
"For as God, regenerating us in baptism, ingrafts us into the fellowship of his Church, and makes us his by adoption, so we have said that he performs the office of a provident parent, in continually supplying the food by which he may sustain and preserve us in the life to which he has begotten us by his word (Institutes 4.17.1)."
You are right that he united it with faith. Again, if you were to read my article, you would see that I do the same. Christ's work is the ONLY meritorious work of salvation and the only thing that can earn anyone salvation. But this merit must still be applied. Faith and Baptism are the instruments by which Christ's merit is applied. Quoting myself from above:
"Similarly, faith, repentance, and baptism are how God applies Christ’s merit to the sinner. The sinner’s agency to passively accept God’s merit does not negate that salvation is entirely a work of God. Faith and repentance are distinct from baptism, yet they are not separate from it. Therefore, proponents of BR can still affirm the precious doctrine of Sola Fide."
This is what the Church has believed for 2000 years. This is what the early reformers believed. If you want to say it's heresy, go ahead. But you're counting 1600 years of Christians as heretics in danger of hell, at least up until the Anabaptist Reformation.
My dear friend, I thank you for your zeal, and I do not doubt your sincerity. But truth is not measured by age or antiquity. It matters not if a belief is 2,000 years old if it contradicts the Gospel once delivered to the saints. The Galatian heresy was ancient too, but Paul withstood it to the face.
You affirm that baptism is a necessary instrument for applying the merit of Christ. But permit me to say with all affection—this is no small error. If baptism be a channel of grace, then grace is not free. If justification is through both faith and baptism, then justification is no longer by faith alone. And if salvation depends in any measure upon an ordinance performed by man, then it is no longer all of Christ.
I do not despise baptism—it is a blessed command of our Lord. But let us keep it in its place. It is the outward sign of an inward grace, not the channel by which grace is given. It follows faith; it does not create or complete it. It is the public profession of life, not the cause of life. We are not saved because we are baptized; we are baptized because we are saved.
The thief on the cross believed, and our Lord said to him, ‘Today shalt thou be with me in paradise.’ He had no water, yet he had the promise. Christ did not say, ‘If you had only come down and been baptized, I could have saved you.’ No, He said, ‘Today!’
Charles Spurgeon, preached a famous sermon titled “Baptismal Regeneration” (June 5, 1864), in which he declared:
“Baptismal regeneration is a heresy which is a very dangerous one to men, because it leads them to trust in the outward ceremony instead of the inward grace… It is not the water that saves, but the blood.”
I fear that many make an idol of the font, as others do of the altar. But God will not share His glory. Salvation is of the Lord, not of the baptistery.
If Calvin spoke of regeneration in baptism, then I say, let God be true and every man a liar—even great Reformers. Calvin was a great man, but he was not the Master.
As for Rachel’s creed and your citations, let us remember this: Scripture alone must be our rule. Creeds are only helpful insofar as they echo the Word of God. When they do not, we lay them aside, no matter how esteemed their authors.
In the end, the Gospel is not ‘believe and be baptized and be saved,’ but ‘believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved’ (Acts 16:31). Baptism is the fruit of obedience—not the root of salvation.
This was a really good and in-depth article, and I think you made a convincing biblical and historical case that baptism does indeed save. I was raised Baptist, but have recently changed my views on baptism due to the research I have done, and decided to become Presbyterian. Although I am incredibly thankful for the values instilled in me from my Baptist upbringing, this experience of changing denominations has been overwhelmingly positive, and I have learned a lot about church history, theology, and biblical interpretation.
Thanks for the encouragement Rachel! I love my Presbyterian brothers and sisters. A great intellectual and devotional tradition.
By the way, baptism is an action, something you do. It is a method or work. Trying to work your way into heaven by getting baptism is not scriptural. It’s false teaching and far from orthodox.
Well then “that side” of the denomination is teaching heresy.
You claim you have Merit to enter heaven. You have no merit!
Ephesians 2:8–9 (ESV):
“For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast.
Titus 3:5 (ESV)
“He saved us, not because of works done by us in righteousness, but according to his own mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewal of the Holy Spirit.”
• Romans 11:6 (ESV)
“But if it is by grace, it is no longer on the basis of works; otherwise grace would no longer be grace.”
The father of the Presbyterian Church is widely considered to be John Calvin (1509–1564)
Calvin did not believe that baptism, by itself, saves. He taught that baptism is a means of grace, but only effective when joined with true faith. In other words, baptism is not magical or salvific on its own; it is a sign and seal of God’s promises, which become effective through the work of the Holy Spirit in the believer.
So, I don’t know if you are talking about some random off branch of Presbyterians, I know they belief in pedo baptism, but they DO NOT affirm baptism saves. That’s heresy dear friend.
Baptism is a necessary part of the Christian life, but it does not cause salvation. The grace of God brings salvation, and baptism is a sign of that grace—not a substitute for it.”
— Sproul, paraphrased from lectures and Truths We Confess (one the greatest Presbyterian brothers)
"And so we utterly condemn the vanity of those who affirm the sacraments to be nothing else than naked and bare signs. No, we assuredly believe that by Baptism we are engrafted into Christ Jesus, to be made partakers of His righteousness, by which our sins are covered and remitted... Therefore, if anyone slanders us by saying that we affirm or believe the sacraments to be symbols and nothing more, they are libellous and speak against the plain facts."
— The Scots Confession
Take note here. That you had to rely on the mind of a man to come up with an idea that baptism helps save and renew the heart. You cannot quote scripture and come up with the same conclusion. I have taught bad doctrine before also, it’ll get better.
RC Sproul would be disappointed (famous Presbyterian)
"Am I now trying to win the approval of human beings [such as R. C Sproul], or of God? Or am I trying to please people? If I were still trying to please people, I would not be a servant of Christ."
— Galatians 1:10
And btw, R. C. Sproul was not a good representative of Reformed theology. Presbyterians do believe that baptism saves.
https://youtu.be/R3uKvd1uGFU?si=z0mZEpB9ZNAvf5Sh
Yes, ofc I want an hour long article on baptismal regeneration for my Saturday afternoon. Why are you even asking?
🤌🏼🤌🏼🤌🏼
The cleansing of sin, or expiation, is the act of God by which sin is removed, resulting in the absolution of guilt and the restoration of fellowship with Him. Through expiation, accomplished by Christ’s atoning work, man is reconciled to God, as the wall of sin is removed. Another term for expiation is the "remission of sins," which Scripture closely associates with baptism (Acts 2:38; 22:16).
This is problematic if it’s implying that baptism itself is the means by which sins are expiated or removed—as if the water cleanses sin rather than Christ’s blood. That’s not consistent with the broader teaching of Scripture.
The cleansing of sin, or expiation, is the act of God by which sin is removed through the atoning death of Jesus Christ. This results in the absolution of guilt and restoration of fellowship with God. Through faith in Christ, man is reconciled to God, as the barrier of sin is taken away. Baptism, while not the means of salvation, is the outward sign of this inward cleansing and is closely associated with the believer’s public identification with Christ and His saving work (Acts 2:38; Romans 6:3–4).
Tyler, it seems to me that you did not read the whole article, or perhaps that you skimmed important parts of it. That can be forgiven because it is rather long and tedious. But if you are going to make claims about what I think without reading/understanding my work, that becomes a problem.
For example, you say that "baptism is an action, something you do. It is a method or work. Trying to work your way into heaven by getting baptism is not scriptural. It’s false teaching and far from orthodox." I clearly refute that in my article. Maybe you disagree with me, but you don't deal with my argument—you just state the point again. If you read my article, you'll see clearly that there is strong Scriptural proof that baptism is not meritorious, much like faith is not meritorious but still required for salvation.
Interestingly, you get upset at Rachel for using the Scot's Confession because it is the "words of man" while quoting Sproul and relying on Calvin.
Oh, and yes, Calvin did hold to Baptismal Regeneration:
"For as God, regenerating us in baptism, ingrafts us into the fellowship of his Church, and makes us his by adoption, so we have said that he performs the office of a provident parent, in continually supplying the food by which he may sustain and preserve us in the life to which he has begotten us by his word (Institutes 4.17.1)."
You are right that he united it with faith. Again, if you were to read my article, you would see that I do the same. Christ's work is the ONLY meritorious work of salvation and the only thing that can earn anyone salvation. But this merit must still be applied. Faith and Baptism are the instruments by which Christ's merit is applied. Quoting myself from above:
"Similarly, faith, repentance, and baptism are how God applies Christ’s merit to the sinner. The sinner’s agency to passively accept God’s merit does not negate that salvation is entirely a work of God. Faith and repentance are distinct from baptism, yet they are not separate from it. Therefore, proponents of BR can still affirm the precious doctrine of Sola Fide."
This is what the Church has believed for 2000 years. This is what the early reformers believed. If you want to say it's heresy, go ahead. But you're counting 1600 years of Christians as heretics in danger of hell, at least up until the Anabaptist Reformation.
My dear friend, I thank you for your zeal, and I do not doubt your sincerity. But truth is not measured by age or antiquity. It matters not if a belief is 2,000 years old if it contradicts the Gospel once delivered to the saints. The Galatian heresy was ancient too, but Paul withstood it to the face.
You affirm that baptism is a necessary instrument for applying the merit of Christ. But permit me to say with all affection—this is no small error. If baptism be a channel of grace, then grace is not free. If justification is through both faith and baptism, then justification is no longer by faith alone. And if salvation depends in any measure upon an ordinance performed by man, then it is no longer all of Christ.
I do not despise baptism—it is a blessed command of our Lord. But let us keep it in its place. It is the outward sign of an inward grace, not the channel by which grace is given. It follows faith; it does not create or complete it. It is the public profession of life, not the cause of life. We are not saved because we are baptized; we are baptized because we are saved.
The thief on the cross believed, and our Lord said to him, ‘Today shalt thou be with me in paradise.’ He had no water, yet he had the promise. Christ did not say, ‘If you had only come down and been baptized, I could have saved you.’ No, He said, ‘Today!’
Charles Spurgeon, preached a famous sermon titled “Baptismal Regeneration” (June 5, 1864), in which he declared:
“Baptismal regeneration is a heresy which is a very dangerous one to men, because it leads them to trust in the outward ceremony instead of the inward grace… It is not the water that saves, but the blood.”
I fear that many make an idol of the font, as others do of the altar. But God will not share His glory. Salvation is of the Lord, not of the baptistery.
If Calvin spoke of regeneration in baptism, then I say, let God be true and every man a liar—even great Reformers. Calvin was a great man, but he was not the Master.
As for Rachel’s creed and your citations, let us remember this: Scripture alone must be our rule. Creeds are only helpful insofar as they echo the Word of God. When they do not, we lay them aside, no matter how esteemed their authors.
In the end, the Gospel is not ‘believe and be baptized and be saved,’ but ‘believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved’ (Acts 16:31). Baptism is the fruit of obedience—not the root of salvation.