Born of Water and of the Spirit: The New Birth

Jesus said to Nicodemus in John 3:3, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born again he cannot see the kingdom of God" (NASU) and then a couple of verses later expounds upon his statement when he says, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit he cannot enter into the kingdom of God." (John 3:5 NASU)

This passage has troubled people over the years. What does it mean to be born of water and the Spirit? The real problem lies not in the difficulty of the passage but rather with those who are unwilling to accept the obvious import of the passage.

People often fail to understand Bible passages not because they are difficult but rather due to prejudice, closed minds. While I want to discuss the entire phrase "born of water and the Spirit," I first want to give you an example of what I am talking about as it relates to the passage we will be discussing. One very well-known Bible scholar who is also an author, and one I might add who has profited me in some of the things he has written, said of this passage that water here could not mean water.

In his mind, this was such a settled fact that there was no reason to even think about giving a reason for making such a statement, and he did not give one. The mind is closed to the thought. It is not worthy of consideration, for it is simply not possible for water to mean water in this passage. It has to mean something else.

Let us now deal with the passage and make it as simple as it really is. I begin by saying that it is essential to come to a correct understanding, as our eternal lives depend on it. Jesus says if we are not "born of water and the Spirit," we cannot enter into the kingdom of God.

I need not tell you that salvation is in God's kingdom, not outside it. It is essential to get into the kingdom of God if we hope to be saved. We are either in the domain of darkness or in the kingdom of God. There is no middle ground; it is an either-or proposition; we are either in or we are out.

Paul speaking to Christians says, "For He rescued us from the domain of darkness, and transferred us to the kingdom of His beloved Son." (Col. 1:13 NASU) Whether we are in the domain of darkness or in Christ's kingdom depends on whether or not we have met his qualifications for being in his kingdom.

I know this is hard for us to sometimes accept, for we know people we would consider good people who are not Christians. They are moral people; they are honest; they work hard; they treat us well, and it is hard to see how God could reject them. It is hard for us to accept that they are in the domain of darkness.

They are like Cornelius in Acts 10, a man of whom nothing but good was spoken of. The Scriptures say of him that he was "a devout man and one who feared God with all his household, and gave many alms to the Jewish people and prayed to God continually." (Acts 10:2 NASU) But I remind the reader that Cornelius, to be saved, had to hear, believe, and obey the gospel for salvation.

If he was already saved, in the state he was in, why bother Peter? Why does Peter need to travel to Caesarea, in view of the fact that it is a waste of his time to preach to Cornelius if Cornelius, a good man, is already saved? He was not saved. Peter later reported to the brethren back in Jerusalem about this matter saying, "He (Cornelius—DS) reported to us how he had seen the angel standing in his house, and saying, 'Send to Joppa and have Simon, who is also called Peter, brought here; and he will speak words (the gospel--DS) to you by which you will be saved, you and all your household.'" (Acts 11:13-14 NASU)

When a man obeys the gospel, it is an act of submission to God's will. We will either submit to his will or our own. When we refuse to submit to his will, no matter how good we are in other areas of life, how can it be truly said that we are godly? By our refusal to obey the gospel, we are saying we do not need God, Jesus did not need to die for me (his death was a waste, I did not need it), and I am not a sinner. The very fact that we refuse to obey the gospel, a command of God, proves in itself that we are in rebellion, in sin.

This being the case, how is one born of water and the Spirit, which is the equivalent of hearing, believing, and obeying the gospel? I say first of all that this is a single birth rather than two separate ones. How do I know? Because Jesus tells us so, just two verses before this verse, for he says in John 3:3, "unless one is born again he cannot see the kingdom of God." (NASU) How many times does Jesus say a man is born again? Once! If we make these two births, one of water and the other of the Spirit, then we have one more birth than Jesus requires. One is born again, not twice, but once.

What is the role of the Spirit? Jesus says in John 6:44-45, "No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him; and I will raise him up on the last day. It is written in the prophets, 'AND THEY SHALL ALL BE TAUGHT OF GOD.' Everyone who has heard and learned from the Father, comes to Me." (NASU)

How is one taught of God? The answer is through the teachings of the Spirit, the Holy Spirit, found in our day in the pages of the New Testament. Hear Jesus, "It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh profits nothing; the words that I have spoken to you are spirit and are life." (John 6:63 NASU) So it is clearly seen that words do make a difference in bringing about spiritual life; the words of the Spirit bring life.

Peter says we have "been born again not of seed which is perishable but imperishable, that is, through the living and enduring word of God." (1 Peter 1:23 NASU) God's word is living. James says, "In the exercise of His will He brought us forth by the word of truth." (James 1:18 NASU) God's word produces life in those who believe and accept it. James, "brought us forth" in this passage, is a reference to how the process of being born again comes about, by the "word of truth."

The Spirit works in bringing about the new birth in a man or woman by means of the word of God in the pages of the New Testament. In the parable of the sower (or soils if you prefer), as found in Luke 8, Jesus said "the seed is the word of God." (Luke 8:11) As it is sown in the hearts of people, it bears fruit, not in all but in those willing to hear and accept it. Four types of soil are mentioned in the parable, but only one type brought forth fruit. Jesus, in speaking of that soil, says "the seed in the good soil, these are the ones who have heard the word in an honest and good heart, and hold it fast, and bear fruit with perseverance." (Luke 8:15 NASU)

When one accepts the word of God and allows it to work in his life, having an honest and good heart, faith develops and leads the man to repentance, changing him within in his inner being, his spirit. He now believes differently, has different goals and aspirations, and wants to live a different life. When this occurs, the first prerequisite for the new birth has been met. However, Jesus also says in John 3:5 that one must be born not only of the Spirit but also of water if he is to enter into the kingdom of God.

Here is where multitudes have come up short. They fail to accept baptism. Needless to say, water is a reference to baptism. However, lest I be like the man who says water is not water but offers no proof, I need to prove my statement.

First of all, Jesus taught that baptism was essential when he gave the Great Commission (Matt. 28:19-20). He says, "He who has believed and has been baptized shall be saved…" (Mark 16:16 NASU). He does not say "he who has believed and has not been baptized shall be saved," even though many want to read it that way. The baptism of the Great Commission was in water and thus was essential for salvation.

But let us look at some other passages that, relating to the new birth, are even clearer. "Therefore we have been buried with Him through baptism into death, so that as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, so we too might walk in newness of life." (Rom. 6:4 NASU) When do we walk in newness of life (born again, the new birth)? When we have been baptized.

Take a look at 2 Cor. 5:17, "Therefore if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creature; the old things passed away; behold, new things have come." (NASU) A new creature equals a new birth. The Bible tells us how to enter Christ. "For all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ." (Gal. 3:27 NASU) Now, what does it take to get into Christ—baptism. Paul says we are "baptized into Christ." Then we are the new creature.

Where is salvation? Peter says, "there is salvation in no one else" (Acts 4:12 NASU), speaking of Jesus. Paul says, "For this reason I endure all things for the sake of those who are chosen, so that they also may obtain the salvation which is in Christ Jesus and with it eternal glory." (2 Tim. 2:10 NASU) Getting into Christ Jesus is thus essential.

One is a new creature upon entering into Christ (born again). One enters Christ by the act of baptism, having been baptized as a result of the consequences of the Spirit working in his life. "For by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body." (1 Cor. 12:13 NASU) That body into which we are baptized is the body of Christ, the body where one finds salvation, "He Himself being the Savior of the body." (Eph. 5:23 NASU)

Let us take a look at a couple of passages that teach just what Jesus taught about the new birth in John 3, but which are often overlooked. Paul says in Titus 3:5 (NASU), "He saved us, not on the basis of deeds which we have done in righteousness, but according to His mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewing by the Holy Spirit."

God's mercy, his grace, saves us, but how? By the washing of regeneration and renewing by the Holy Spirit. This is just another way of saying exactly what Jesus said in John 3:5 regarding being born of water and the Spirit. The washing of regeneration is baptism.

In another parallel passage Paul says in Eph. 5:25-26 regarding Jesus and the church (the church being his spiritual body, the body he saves, Eph. 1:22-23), "Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ also loved the church and gave Himself up for her, so that He might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word." (NASU) Yes, water is water in John 3:5, and not something else, and Jesus says his word "gives life" (John 6:63 NAS) and that his words "are spirit" (John 6:63 NAS).

If this passage does not clarify what it means to be born of water and the Spirit, I am not sure I know what it would take. How are we cleansed; how are we born again; how are we saved? By the washing of water (baptism—DS) with the word (the Spirit using the word as his tool to change us in our spirit).

Thus, the new birth, what it means to be born again, to be born of water and the Spirit, is not that difficult and could be easily understood if we had open minds.

However, like the Jews of old, we often have too much at stake to allow us to see the truth. We have family that has passed on, and we cannot allow water to mean baptism, for we think that would condemn them. We cannot allow water to mean water, for if we were to accept that, it would make demands on us to comply, which might alienate friends and family who do not believe baptism is essential. The sacrifice is too great; we will not allow it. We will not allow water to be baptism. It has to mean something else.

Will not God condemn us for our hardness of heart when he has made a thing as clear as this, yet we refuse to accept it? When we prefer spiritual blindness rather than light, what do we think he will say to us in the Day of Judgment?

But now to make the application personal, the question for us all is what will we do in the face of the truth? Do we accept it or deny it? Do we act on it, or do we remain passive and do nothing? What will you say to Jesus on the last day?

"If anyone loves Me, he will keep My word." (Jesus—John 14:23 NASU)

I do think it would be appropriate to comment before closing to any who hold back from obeying Jesus in the new birth because of a loved one who passed on without going through that birth. Here are some points to consider. (1) Jesus teaches we must love him above father, mother, son, or daughter (Matt. 10:37). (2) If a loved one failed to get to heaven do you think you would be doing them a favor by joining them? Is that what they would want? Read Luke 16:19-31. The rich man in this account did not want his five brothers joining him. (3) Finally, why not leave judgment up to God? "Shall not the Judge of all the earth do right?" (Gen. 18:25 NKJV)

Note: Underlining in verses quoted was by me to emphasize certain statements and was not in the original quoted texts.

The Great Commission and Cornelius

Many people believe that Cornelius was saved the moment the Holy Spirit fell on him. I disagree. The account of his conversion is recorded in Acts 10. It is a topic worthy of discussion.

It is clear that the Holy Spirit fell upon Cornelius and his household before their baptism (Acts 10:47). At its core the issue is whether or not water baptism is for the remission of sins as stated in Acts 2:38 and many other passages (1 Peter 3:21, Acts 22:16, John 3:5, Mark 16:16). Or, is there some other way way God has designed for man to receive remission of his transgressions?

I want to address something I had overlooked until I was doing some reading where it was brought to my attention. In his preaching to Cornelius and his household, Peter said in Acts 10:43, "To Him all the prophets witness that, through His name, whoever believes in Him will receive remission of sins." (NKJV) In the very next verse (verse 44), we are told that "While Peter was still speaking these words, the Holy Spirit fell upon all those who heard the word." (Acts 10:44 NKJV)

I want you to take a closer look at verse 43, three words there that I had overlooked. What were they? The words "through His name." It was pointed out to me that words do have meanings and they are not just written to take up space. "Through His name, whoever believes in Him will have remission of sins." (Acts 10:43 NKJV)

Here is the point: the phrase "through His name" designates a relationship with the name. Meaning what? For that, we have to go back to the Great Commission Jesus gave himself in Matt. 28:18-20. Let me quote that:

"And Jesus came and spoke to them, saying, 'All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth. Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age.' Amen." (Matt. 28:18-20 NKJV)

Here is something the reader may not be aware of, a thing easily overlooked. Do you know the word translated "in," where it says "in the name," should correctly be translated by the word "into?" That is to say, the Greek means "into." If you do not believe that, check it out for yourself by getting a New American Standard original edition reference Bible and check the side margin or center column references. If you do not have one, here is what you will find: the exact words, "Lit., into". Lit. means literal, meaning "into" is the literal translation. The original American Standard translation of 1901 used the word "into" in the text itself, as does the more recent Literal Translation of the Bible.

So what is the big deal as I do not want to lose your attention by doing mere word studies? Jesus is teaching that when we are baptized in water, as per Acts 2:38, we are being baptized into a relationship not only with him but also with the Father and the Holy Spirit. Does this comport with other scriptures? Yes, it does. Here are some passages that do not just teach that we are baptized into Christ but specifically state it. (I add that no one doubts that the baptism of the Great Commission is water baptism since man is directed to perform it.)

"Or do you not know that as many of us as were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into His death?" (Rom. 6:3 NKJV) Gal. 3:27, "For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ." (NKJV) One gets into Christ by water baptism.

Please note what Paul said in 1 Cor. 1:13, "Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul?" (NKJV) Do you know that the word "in" here should be the word "into"? Again, check it out using the references I have already alluded to. The Corinthians were not being baptized into a relationship with Paul, or any other man, but with Christ, and he wanted them to know that.

I think it goes without saying that all agree the Christian has a relationship with the Holy Spirit, and the scriptures also teach the same relationship with the Father and Jesus. Hear Jesus, "If anyone loves Me, he will keep My word (is baptism for the remission of sins, Acts 2:38, a part of the word?--DS); and My Father will love him, and We will come to him and make Our home with him." (John 14:23 NKJV) Jesus again speaks in John 17:20-21, "I do not pray for these alone, but also for those who will believe in Me through their word; that they all may be one, as You, Father, are in Me, and I in You; that they also may be one in Us, that the world may believe that You sent Me." (NKJV) See also Rom. 8:9-11.

The point I am trying to make is that when we are baptized according to Jesus, the baptism of the Great Commission, we are put into that relationship with him where he dwells within us, as does the Father, and the Holy Spirit--we in them, they in us. In voluntarily coming into this relationship, we are willingly and gladly bringing ourselves into submission to their authority and receive all the blessings that go along with that.

That the baptism of the Great Commission was water baptism goes without saying, as the command was made to men to do this. Only God, not man, can baptize one in the Holy Spirit. Furthermore, those they taught and baptized were to go out and do the same thing ("teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you" Matt. 28:20 NKJV) and that perpetually down through time. This is the "one baptism" of Eph. 4:5 and the baptism that establishes a relationship with Christ.

Now, let us make the application to the case of Cornelius. I quote again Acts 10:43, "To Him all the prophets witness that, through His name, whoever believes in Him will receive remission of sins." (NKJV) So here is the argument. That which we are to receive through his name (remission of sins) is a little hard to receive, is it not, unless and until we have some relationship with that name (with him)? That relationship is granted via way of obedience to the Great Commission, wherein we are baptized into a relationship with Christ, the Father, and the Holy Spirit.

But, there is more. What did the Great Commission of Jesus in Matt. 28 demand of a man? Two things--faith and baptism. (Matt. 28:19) Disciples were first to be made, from which it is evident that believers were to be made, and then they were to be baptized. Mark 16:16 makes it even clearer. "He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned." (Mark 16:16 NKJV) I have said before and say again, the problem with denominational teaching on this subject is that the import of what they teach is the same as if Mark 16:16 read, "He who believes and is not baptized will be saved," for they say it is not essential. I believe Jesus' words are clear.

Do I think it was certain that Cornelius would be saved prior to his baptism? If we are talking about God’s foreknowledge, yes, absolutely, just as much as the faithful Old Testament prophets were who were given the Holy Spirit, but neither were saved without the blood of Jesus which we come into contact with via baptism in our dispensation of time, the Christian dispensation. Paul says we are baptized into Christ's death, which is where he shed his blood, "Or do you not know that as many of us as were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into His death?" (Rom 6:3 NKJV)

Now, would God place his spirit upon one not yet in a saved condition? He could; none of us would deny his power to do so. Would he do it? Who is to say he would not if he had a purpose in doing so? Might there be a purpose here? What?

The gospel was not being taken to the Gentiles as God intended. Some say as much as 10 years had transpired between that first sermon on the Day of Pentecost and Peter going to Cornelius, a Gentile. Even with Peter, an inspired apostle, it took a direct intervention from God himself to convince him he needed to go and talk with a Gentile about salvation. And, as all Bible students know, he took flak for it from the Jews back in Jerusalem and had to defend himself. What convinced those Jews that it was acceptable? Peter's recounting the fact that the Holy Spirit fell on the Gentiles. Would they ever have gone on their own to the Gentiles had this not happened?

When God has a purpose, he may give His Spirit to even a vile sinner. Certainly, I do not place Cornelius in any such class, but I do know he needed the blood of Jesus. But, what I have reference to here is the case of one so vile he was a ring leader in the death of Jesus--Caiaphas.

The Bible says, "And one of them, Caiaphas, being high priest that year, said to them, ‘You know nothing at all, nor do you consider that it is expedient for us that one man should die for the people, and not that the whole nation should perish.’ Now this he did not say on his own authority; but being high priest that year he prophesied that Jesus would die for the nation." (John 11:49-51 NKJV)

Do I think the Holy Spirit remained with Caiaphas? Of course not. But, for a short period of time, because God had a purpose, it was given to him. God had a purpose in giving the Holy Spirit to Cornelius and his household. He accomplished that purpose. The Holy Spirit was not given to Cornelius to save him, nor was it given to him because he was already saved. Like everyone else, Cornelius had to believe and obey the gospel to be saved, and that included being baptized for the remission of sins, or as Jesus put it, "He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned." (Mark 16:16 NKJV) He did not say “he who believes and is not baptized will be saved” as so many seem to proclaim.

[To download this article or print it out click here.]

 

Cornelius' Conversion and Holy Spirit Baptism

The idea is in vogue in some quarters that Cornelius was saved when the Holy Spirit fell upon him (Acts 10:44) without any further action on his part. One of the verses used to support this idea is 1 John 4:13, "By this we know that we abide in Him, and He in us, because He has given us of His Spirit." (NKJV) So, it is said, that settles it.

Go take a look at that verse and read it in context. Verse 12 just before it reads, "If we love one another, God abides in us, and His love has been perfected in us." (NKJV) Two verses down I read this, "Whoever confesses that Jesus is the Son of God, God abides in him, and he in God." (1 John 4:15 NKJV) In a broader context, but still in the book of 1 John, it is said if we keep his word we abide in him and he in us. (1 John 2:5, 1 John 3:24) Thus we have a series of items being listed by which we can measure whether or not we are in a faithful relationship with God. John is writing to fellow Christians thus he uses the word "we."

In the passage, 1 John 4:13, John is not talking about initial obedience to God, gospel obedience. It is speaking to those who are already Christians, as are the other verses in context round about it.

There can be no obedience to what is cast upon you, the Holy Spirit. Cornelius and his household obeyed nothing when they miraculously received the Holy Spirit. They were passive in that.

Receiving the Holy Spirit is not equivalent to obeying the gospel. If receiving the Holy Spirit is equivalent to obeying the gospel for salvation, then there is nothing to obey. Why say that? Only Jesus could baptize one with the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit is a gift, a gift from God. The individual is passive in the matter. The giving of the gift is up to God, not to the individual. Had Cornelius obeyed the gospel at that point in time when he received the Holy Spirit? No!

Paul said, concerning the matter of salvation in Rom. 6:17-18, "But God be thanked that though you were slaves of sin, yet you obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine to which you were delivered. And having been set free from sin, you became slaves of righteousness." (NKJV) There is then something to obey, not something to just passively receive. The gospel must be obeyed.

The Bible says when Jesus returns he will be "taking vengeance on those who do not know God, and on those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ." (2 Thess. 1:8 NKJV) So, we see again, the gospel is something to be obeyed.

What is the nature of that obedience? The answer is to be found in the command of Peter to Cornelius and those gathered with him, "And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord." (Acts 10:48 NKJV)

Let the reader note that obedience from the heart spoken of above (Rom. 6:17) necessarily implies faith, or else how can it be from the heart; thus the obedience being spoken of is in addition to faith, and it is something they must do for themselves — not God do for them or to them.

I do not know of a case in the Bible where it is said or implied that the Holy Spirit was ever said to be given to a man for the purpose of saving him. Yes, a person has the Spirit if he is saved, but is that the reason it was given to him — to save him? That is what needs to be shown.

There is an interesting passage in 1 Cor. 14:22 about the very thing Cornelius received. It reads as follows: "Therefore tongues are for a sign, not to those who believe but to unbelievers; but prophesying is not for unbelievers but for those who believe." (1 Cor. 14:22 NKJV) This has an application to the case of Cornelius. Remember, the evidence that Cornelius and those with him received the Holy Spirit was their speaking in tongues.

Without convincing the Jews that God was willing and desirous of saving the Gentiles, as well as themselves, the gospel never would have been preached to the Gentiles. The Jews were so biased against the Gentiles it was going to take something special and unusual to convince them that God had any interest in Gentiles. Ten years had gone by since Jesus' ascension back into heaven, and yet there had been no preaching to the Gentiles. The Jews up to this point in time did not believe God had an interest in the salvation of Gentiles.

It took a miracle to convince the Jewish Christians otherwise. "And those of the circumcision who believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out on the Gentiles also." (Acts 10:45 NKJV) This was the event that convinced the Jews that it was not only okay but the will of God that the Gentiles also have access to eternal life through the gospel. "When they (the Jewish Christians in Jerusalem — DS) heard these things they became silent; and they glorified God, saying, 'Then God has also granted to the Gentiles repentance to life.'" (Acts 11:18 NKJV) Tongues served for a sign to the Jewish Christians with regard to the Gentile Cornelius, and thus to all Gentiles concerning God's will for them.

This whole episode at the house of Cornelius of being baptized in the Holy Spirit had nothing to do with gospel obedience or conversion. Let us say the Holy Spirit had not fallen upon Cornelius that day. Do you think Cornelius would have been disobedient to, and an unbeliever of, the things Peter was teaching him? Do you think Peter would have left Cornelius as an unsaved man? You know better.

With or without the baptism of the Holy Spirit, Cornelius was going to obey the gospel that day and be saved. Remember his conversion began with an appearance of an angel in a vision telling him to send for Peter, and in doing so he would be told "words by which you and all your household will be saved." (Acts 11:14 NKJV) It was the message believed and obeyed that saved them, not the miracle that happened to them.

One needs to be careful lest he take the exception to the rule and make it the general rule. We do not do that in life, and we should not do it in Bible study. We do not say that the Lord appeared to Saul on the road to Damascus, therefore unless the Lord appears to you personally you cannot be converted. There was a reason Jesus appeared to Saul, and that reason is not applicable to either you or me. We understand this. We need to understand the same principle as it relates to the conversion of Cornelius and his household. It was a one-time event for a special purpose.

It is the gospel that saves people, "for it is the power of God to salvation." (Rom. 1:16 NKJV) It must be believed and obeyed. 

[To download this article or print it out click here.]

The Way Into Christ

It is only human nature to want the way to heaven to be as broad and all-inclusive as possible thus the more ways into Christ that can be found the better from a human perspective.  We have people we want to see saved and yet we are pretty sure they are not due to either the way they are living or to the beliefs they hold thus a broad gate and a wide way to heaven would suit us just fine.  But it goes without saying that our love for one who does not walk in the light of truth cannot change the truth itself.  No man is saved “unconditionally” which is to say saved regardless of belief, character, and conduct.  God saves sinners, true enough, but not while they actively engage in the practice of sin unrepentantly.

The fact remains that no matter how much we desire another’s salvation it is up to them to bring their life into accord with God’s will for neither you nor I can broaden the gate.  “Narrow is the gate and difficult is the way which leads to life and there are few who find it.” (Matt. 7:14 NKJV)

Salvation is found only in Christ.  “Nor is there salvation in any other, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved.” (Acts 4:12 NKJV)  Jesus said he was “the way, the truth, and the life.  No one comes to the Father except through me.” (John 14:6 NKJV)  Again, he says, “I am the door.  If anyone enters by me, he will be saved.” (John 10:9 NKJV)

The point I want to drive home is that salvation is found “in Christ” and not “out of Christ.”  Paul speaks of “the salvation which is in Christ Jesus with eternal glory.” (2 Tim. 2:10 NKJV)  Redemption “is in Christ Jesus.” (Rom. 3:24 NKJV)  Elsewhere Paul says Christ “is the Savior of the body.” (Eph. 5:23 NKJV)  The body of which he is the Savior is his spiritual body, the church, for the church is his body (Eph. 1:22-23, Col. 1:18) which makes being “in Christ” essential.  We must be in that which Christ is going to save.  “If anyone is in Christ he is a new creation,” (2 Cor. 5:17 NKJV) emphasis on “in Christ” and not out of him.  Thus it is essential to be “in Christ” for that is where “every spiritual blessing” is found (Eph. 1:3 NKJV) which, of course, includes salvation itself. 

Having firmly established that salvation is found “in Christ” how then does one enter into Christ?  How many ways are there?  The Bible teaches there are conditions for entering into Christ, prerequisites if you will, namely faith, repentance, and confession all of which are absolutely essential to salvation but none of those things by themselves or even taken collectively will put you “into Christ.”  Only baptism is said to do that--no not baptism by itself  but baptism that is built on faith accompanied by repentance with a willingness to confess Christ.  Baptism is the final step one takes to enter Christ and find salvation in him.

Hear the language Paul uses:  “Do you not know that as many of us as were baptized into Christ Jesus” (Rom. 6:3 NKJV), “as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ” (Gal. 3:27 NKJV), “for by one spirit we were all baptized into one body” (1 Cor. 12:13 NKJV) speaking of the body of Christ.  Baptism puts one into Christ where salvation is found.

How does this accord with the examples of conversions as we find them in Acts?  In Acts 2 on the Day of Pentecost when the first gospel sermon was preached that was ever preached and that by inspiration of the apostle Peter (the Holy Spirit speaking through Peter) people were made believers.  Were they saved?  God did not consider them saved for his command to them through Peter was “repent, and let every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins.” (Acts 2:38 NKJV)  Denominationalism would say they were saved after faith and repentance and the rest of God’s command to them that day (be baptized) was not needed for salvation.  Well, who are you going to believe?  We ought to believe Peter and the Holy Spirit and not our denominational pastors.

Peter said, “Every one of you.”  There were to be and are to be no exceptions.  This brings to mind Paul’s statement to the Corinthians in 1 Cor. 12:13, “For by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body.” (NKJV)  Note here again the phrase “we were all”--that is every one of us.  No, Paul did not do a lot of baptizing personally but that it was done as a result of his preaching and by those working with him there is no doubt for “many of the Corinthians, hearing, believed and were baptized.” (Acts 18:8 NKJV)  No one was considered as “one of them” who was not baptized either on the day of Pentecost in Jerusalem (Acts 2:38) or at Corinth (1 Cor. 12:13).

Paul himself was made a believer and repented when Jesus appeared to him on the road to Damascus.  Was he saved?  Jesus told him directly, “Arise and go into the city, and you will be told what you must do.”   The Lord sent Ananias to tell him what he must do.  What did Ananias tell him?  “Now why are you waiting?  Arise and be baptized, and wash away your sins.” (Acts 22:16 NKJV)  When a man’s sins are gone, washed away, he is “in Christ.”  So no, Paul was not saved on the road to Damascus even though he came to faith and repentance there, not if the word “must” means must.

Paul equates baptism into Christ with putting on Christ.  “For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ.” (Gal. 3:27 NKJV)  When I put on a coat I am in the coat.  When I put on Christ I am in Christ.  That is where I need to be for that is where salvation is found.  Can one be in Christ who has not put on Christ?

We need to always remember Jesus himself commanded baptism (Matt. 28:18-20 NKJV)--the Great Commission.  Why did he do so if it does not matter to him and is non-essential for salvation?  Put yourself for a short moment of time into the apostles' shoes who received this commission (verse 20 teaches we have received that commission as well for it has been handed down to us).  Jesus tells them to make disciples (learners, those who will follow one’s teaching) of all nations baptizing them (Matt. 28:19).  That is a command.  There is no choice about it.

Question--how do you do that in today’s world where people have swallowed the denominational line that you need not be baptized?  We are commanded to baptize those made disciples yet they refuse thinking it unnecessary even though Jesus commanded it.  It ought to be obvious that discipleship ends at that point where one bulks at a command and refuses obedience.

I have said nothing on Mark 16:16, the words of Jesus, “he who believes and is baptized will be saved” but do I need to?  I do not think so.  If words mean anything it is self-explanatory.

I want to deal with some objections.  There are many passages in the Bible that if one wants to be a careless scholar he can lead himself astray.  For example, take a passage like Rom. 5:1-2, written by Paul, “Therefore, having been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom also we have access by faith into this grace in which we stand.” (NKJV)  Or, here is another, “even the righteousness of God which is through faith in Jesus Christ to all and on all who believe.” (Rom. 3:22 NKJV)  A careless scholar takes these passages and many similar ones found throughout the New Testament and says “see, here it is, salvation is by faith and baptism has nothing to do with it.”

Some things are obvious about this kind of scholarship.  For one thing, it pits the writer, Paul, against himself not only in other books of the Bible but in this very same book itself--the book of Romans.  If the reader will just read on to chapter 6 he will find baptism.

“Or do you not know that as many of us as were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? 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.  For if we have been united together in the likeness of his death, certainly we also shall be in the likeness of his resurrection, knowing this, that our old man was crucified with him, that the body of sin might be done away with, that we should no longer be slaves of sin.  For he who has died has been freed from sin.  Now if we died with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with him.” (Rom. 6:3-8 NKJV)

How about the person who has not been baptized into Christ’s death?  What if you have not been “united together in the likeness of his death?” (Rom. 6:5)  The text says “if we have.” (Rom. 6:5)  It does not say “if we have not.”  Baptism is into Christ (Rom. 6:3) and that being the case it is also into the benefits or blessings of Christ’s death.  You only walk in newness of life, a new creature, a new creation, when you arise as such from the waters of baptism for “our old man was crucified with him.” (Rom. 6:6)  Crucifixion means death.  We were baptized “into death.” (Rom. 6:4)  We arise from the baptismal waters to “walk in newness of life” (Rom. 6:4) because “if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; old things have passed away; behold, all things have become new.” (2 Cor. 5: 17 NKJV)  The text says “If we died with Christ.” (Rom. 6:8)  It does not say “if we do not die with Christ.”  We need to read and reason as we do so.

“Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.” (Jesus speaking, John 3:3, NKJV)  “Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.” (Jesus, John 3:5 NKJV)

A man is saved by faith, the Bible teaches that, but it is a faith that truly believes and thus acts.  That is why on the Day of Pentecost when God told the people, speaking through Peter, to repent and be baptized for the remission of sins the people did it.  Why, because they believed God’s message.  That is why Paul, then known as Saul, was baptized when God speaking through Ananias told him to arise and be baptized and wash away his sins.  Why?  Because he believed what God’s messenger Ananias told him.

Faith or belief has been perverted today.  Thus today you cannot read Peter’s sermon as delivered on the Day of Pentecost in Acts 2, believe it, and be accepted as a man of faith by the majority in Christendom.  Why, because the consensus is today that you do not have to believe what Peter said to do for the remission of sins and if you do believe it that is heresy.  Thus there can be no faith in what Peter preached as a command to the people that day.  Faith today thus means no faith.  Yes, it is strange and hard to reason out (maybe because there is no reason to it).  It is a perversion of faith.  Scriptural faith means you believe what Peter preached, not disbelieve it.

In the Bible when it comes to salvation faith and obedience are so linked together that there can be no saving faith without the obedience that proceeds from it.  Here is a perfect example.  Heb. 3:18-19, “And to whom did he swear that they would not enter his rest, but to those who did not obey?  So we see that they could not enter in because of unbelief.” (NKJV)  Why did the children of Israel under Moses’ leadership not enter the land of Canaan, the land of rest?  Because they heard God’s command to go take the land but they did not believe God (did not believe he would give them the power to overcome the inhabitants) and not believing they would not obey.  That is where most of Christendom is today with baptism.  They know what the Bible clearly says about it but they are unwilling to obey because they do not believe plain statements of scripture concerning baptism’s function and purpose.

One thing that would help men greatly in understanding faith is if they would learn what a synecdoche is.  A synecdoche is a figure of speech “by which we speak of the whole by a part, or a part by using a term denoting the whole…This is many times the case with the salvation of sinners.  The whole number of conditions is indicated by the use of one.  Generally the first one is mentioned-that of faith-because without it nothing else could follow.” (Prof. D. R. Dungan, Hermeneutics, Pages 300-305)  We should not read the Bible, come across the word faith, and think without giving it thought that it necessarily means mental assent alone.  Be a scholar and study it out and see based on the context and the totality of New Testament teaching on the subject what the word means where it is located.

I want to deal with one other passage and that by Peter before closing.  In Acts 10:43 Peter is at the house of Cornelius preaching and says this, “To him all the prophets witness that, through his name, whoever believes in him will receive remission of sins.” (NKJV)  This is the same Peter who preached on the Day of Pentecost that those there must repent and be baptized for the remission of sins.  Has he now changed his tune in chapter 10, at a later date, and is he now preaching another gospel?

No, for in the New Testament faith and baptism fit together as a unit.  It is simple, if you believe, if you truly believe, you are baptized.  Again, did Peter change his tune here versus what he taught on the Day of Pentecost, no not at all.  The text says five verses later, speaking of Peter addressing Cornelius and his household, “And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord.” (Acts 10:48 NKJV)  One who believes in Jesus believes what Jesus said and what Jesus said was “he who believes and is baptized will be saved.” (Mark 16:16 NKJV)  What Jesus said was, “Unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.” (John 3:5 NKJV)  Yes, even Cornelius had to be baptized and was “commanded” to do it.

Baptism is a test of the purity or sincerity of faith.  It is not whether you believe me but whether you believe Jesus and his apostles.  Yes, there is only one way into Christ but man has sought out many inventions to try and circumvent the way of the Lord. 

[To download this article or print it out click here.]

    

The Case of Cornelius and the Holy Spirit

There are many who believe beyond doubt that Cornelius was saved at the time the Holy Spirit came upon him and his household.  It is a topic that ought to be discussed.  While I have written once before on this subject more needs to be said as there has been some objection to what was written. 

I know of no person who claims to be a Christian who would deny the fact that the very first gospel sermon ever preached after Christ's death, burial, and resurrection was in the city of Jerusalem on the day of Pentecost as recorded in Acts chapter two.  Neither do I know a man who would deny but what the words spoken by Peter were given by the Holy Spirit. 

The reader ought to note and carefully digest what the Holy Spirit, speaking through Peter, said on that occasion in response to those who asked "Men and brethren, what shall we do?" (Acts 2:37 NKJV)  They had heard the sermon Peter preached, believed it, and now these men who were "cut to the heart" (Acts 2:37 NKJV) find themselves in need of forgiveness.  What is Peter's reply speaking by the Holy Spirit?  It is "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 NKJV) 

Now note, when does the Holy Spirit speaking through Peter promise these believers they will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit?  Is it before repentance and baptism for the remission of sins or after?  The answer is evident.  This raises a question.  Is there one gospel in one location and another in a different location so that we can never really know what the gospel is?  Does the Holy Spirit preach one message concerning salvation in one location but a different one elsewhere?  Does God show partiality toward some?  Are some saved one way and others in a different way?  The Bible says, "there is no partiality with God" (Rom 2:11 NKJV) and Paul says there is but "one faith" (Eph. 4:4) while saying also of one who preaches another gospel "let him be accursed." (Gal. 1:8). 

All of this being the case then how does one account for the fact that in the account of Cornelius' conversion we have the Holy Spirit arriving before, rather than after, baptism?  Has the Holy Spirit suddenly changed his mind on repentance and baptism being for the forgiveness of sins as he formerly taught?  And, if he has changed his mind this one time is it possible he may change his mind again?  Has he changed his mind on there even being but one gospel? 

The answer is obviously no.  What the Holy Spirit taught on the day of Pentecost he also taught approximately 10 years later at the household of Cornelius.  Repentance and baptism still retain the same position in God's plan of salvation for man as they did on the day of Pentecost in Acts 2. 

How then does one account for the Spirit arriving before baptism in the case of Cornelius?  If one reads carefully all of Acts 10 and 11 he will see God's reason.  The gospel was meant to be preached to all men of all races and nationalities.  And, yet, quite a number of years have gone by since Pentecost and where are we at?  We are still at the point where the vast majority of Jewish Christians cannot believe the gospel is for Gentiles as well as Jews.  Judaism, out of which they came, had been an exclusive religion to the Jewish race.  Yes, there were proselytes to it but there was never a Great Commission in Judaism to go out into the world and make converts of the Gentiles. 

Even Peter, an apostle, though inspired so he could teach and preach without the possibility of error, does not fully comprehend the meaning of the message Christ taught in Matt. 28:18-19--the Great Commission.  This was nothing new for prophets often did not know the full import of the inspired words they spoke. (see 1 Peter 1:10-12) 

In reading Acts 10 one learns by seeing Peter's initial reaction to the heavenly sent vision he had that Peter was still observing as law the dietary restrictions found under the Law of Moses all the while living under the law of Christ.  Then in verse 28 of chapter 10 he says, "You know how unlawful it is for a Jewish man to keep company with or go to one of another nation.  But God has shown me that I should not call any man common or unclean."  This was the purpose of the vision—to bring about a change in Peter's attitude toward going to the Gentiles. 

Note the word "unlawful" in that verse.  Up until the time of this vision Peter was lacking a full understanding of how the Law of Moses had now been completely done away with.  He was still, up to this time, concerned about dietary commands and keeping a distance from Gentiles.  It took the vision of the sheet let down from heaven and the Spirit speaking to him directly (Acts 10:19-20) to convince Peter it was God's will to go to the Gentiles and preach. 

Why did the Holy Spirit fall upon Cornelius and his household before baptism for the remission of sins?  Was it because that was the means of salvation or because Cornelius was already a saved man without repentance and baptism?  No.  It was because it was going to take a miracle, not now so much for Peter because he seems to be getting the idea, but in order for the whole Jewish Christian body to come to an understanding that the gospel was for all and not just for Jews and to get them out preaching and teaching the Gentiles.  In fact, when the Holy Spirit fell upon Cornelius and his household the Bible says of those Jews who had traveled with Peter that they were "astonished" that this had happened, that God would grant this to Gentiles. (Acts 10:45) 

When Peter went back to Jerusalem, to show you and me how great the prejudice was against the Gentiles, the Bible says, and it is speaking of Jewish Christians (read the context), that "those of the circumcision contended with him." (Acts 11:2 NKJV)  Peter had to rehearse the whole account of what had happened to silence his critics but having done so they realize for the first time that "God has also granted to the Gentiles repentance to life." (Acts 11:18)  The world has now changed in that henceforth the gospel will be preached to all men everywhere as God intended but it took a miracle to get the job done.  They, the Jewish Christians, would never have been convinced without it.  They now confess, "Then God has also granted to the Gentiles repentance to life." (Acts 11:18 NKJV) 

Thus we have the real reason the Holy Spirit fell upon Cornelius and his household prior to baptism.  It was not for the forgiveness of sins for the gospel had not changed.  Peter still needed to "command them to be baptized." (Acts 10:48)  But, who really commanded them to be baptized?  Was it Peter the man or the Holy Spirit?  If the Holy Spirit commanded it why did he do so?  

I know one who argues that Cornelius and his household were already saved having received the Holy Spirit.  Yet, the Holy Spirit commands them to be baptized.  Is this baptism to be for some other reason than what the Holy Spirit first said in Peter's inspired sermon in Acts 2:38?  Is baptism for one reason or purpose at one time and place but then for another reason in another time and place? 

God granted, in the case of Cornelius and his household, the Spirit prior to baptism (baptism for the remission of sins which the Spirit taught in Acts 2:38) for a special reason but the reader must bear in mind that God knows our hearts and what we will do before we do it.  God knew Cornelius would obey the command and be baptized for the very reason those on the day of Pentecost were--because they believed every word Peter spoke and part of that word was baptism for the remission of sins (or to be saved which is one and the same thing).  This is as it was on the day of Pentecost for the message never changed.  What was preached in one place was preached in every place. 

They were the things the angel said Peter would tell them--"tell you words by which you and all your household will be saved." (Acts 11:14 NKJV)  An essential part of that word that we know Peter spoke was baptism for the text says "he commanded them to be baptized."  (Acts 10:48 NKJV)  Without preaching on that topic Cornelius and his household would have no idea of what, why, or how. 

Yes, some say baptism is just a symbol or a picture and is meaningless other than as a symbol.  Tell Peter that.  Better yet tell the Holy Spirit he did not know what he was talking about in Acts 2:38 on the day of Pentecost.  If those in the audience on the day of Pentecost were saved without baptism they did not know it for they are asking what they must do after they had already come to faith.  Furthermore, Peter did not know it for he told them what to do.  That is pretty much the end of the story. 

Yes, the case of Cornelius was unique and an exception to the rule but it is not the only such case for when God has seen a need he has acted for the specific purpose he had in mind.  Saul was converted and became the apostle Paul but not because he heard the gospel in the normal way and responded.  We doubt that would ever have happened with Saul left to his own devices with the attitude he had.  But, God acted directly and the Lord appeared to Saul on the road to Damascus.  Why, because he had a special reason for doing so.  The case of Cornelius is similar in that regards. 

I close with this.  One who has objected to my position has said that 1 John 4:13 means Cornelius was saved before baptism.  I deny that.  1 John 4:13 is the word of God and truth.  But, the case of Cornelius and his household, like the case of Saul in his conversion, was a special act of God for a specific purpose God had in mind but neither set aside the commands God himself had given.  Cornelius still had to be baptized for the remission of sins and Saul still had to do the same (Acts 22:16).  God is not in a battle with his own law.  

I might add this as I close.  What if Cornelius that day after receiving the Holy Spirit had responded to Peter's command to be baptized by refusing to do it?  Would he have been saved?  The Holy Spirit does not force a man to do right against his will.  What if Cornelius had said no?  If he was already saved and baptism does not matter, as so many teach, it is hard to see how a refusal would have mattered.

[To download this article or print it out click here.]