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 NKJV
There
is an old joke, told by Baptists and others, of a country Church of
Christ. Just behind the church building
was a frog pond. Because they heard it
so much, instead of saying “ribbit,” the frogs would croak, “Acts 2:38.”
Acts
2:38 is a favorite among those who believe you must be baptized to be
saved. Baptists and many others, of
course, believe baptism is a symbol or picture of salvation, but is not a part
of salvation. I thought it might be
helpful to give a few outstanding quotes on Acts 2:38 from various authors:
Warren
W. Wiersbe
“It
is unfortunate that the translation of Acts 2:38 in the King James Version
suggests that people must be baptized in order to be saved, because this is not
what the Bible teaches. The Greek word
eis (which is translated ‘for’ in the phrase ‘for the remission of sins’) can
mean ‘on account of’ or ‘on the basis of.’
In Matthew 3:11, John the Baptist baptized on the basis that people had
repented. Acts 2:38 should not be used
to teach salvation by baptism. If baptism
is essential for salvation, it seems strange that Peter said nothing about
baptism in his other sermons (Acts 3:12-26; 5:29-32; 10:34-43). In fact, the people in the home of Cornelius
received the Holy Spirit before they were baptized (Acts 10:44-48)! Since believers are commanded to be baptized,
it is important that we have a clean conscience by obeying (1 Peter 3:21), but
we must not think that baptism is a part of salvation. If so, then nobody in Hebrews 11 was saved,
because none of them was ever baptized.”
-Warren W. Wiersbe, The Wiersbe Commentary, David C. Cook;
2003.
John
R. Rice
“It
is clear from the Great Commission in Matthew 28:19-20 and Mark 16:15[-16] and
the universal practice of New Testament Christians, that converts ought to be
baptized. Baptism was not essential to
salvation, but it was essential and is essential to obedience. Baptism did not procure salvation, but it
declared salvation one had already received.
Since
many Scriptures expressly declare that one who trusts in Christ for salvation
instantly has everlasting life (John 3:15,16,18,36; John 5:24; John 6:47; Acts
13:38-39), then the one who has trusted Christ is immediately saved and the
baptism which followed could only declare that which had already occurred.
Baptism
is a work of righteousness (as Jesus stated in Matthew 3:15). But Titus 3:5 declares, ‘Not by works of
righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by
the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost.’ Salvation is ‘not
of works, lest any man should boast’ (Ephesians 2:9. (See the author’s book, Bible
Baptism, Sword of the Lord.)
Jesus
never needed to repent. He could not
repent as our example. Jesus never was
in unbelief and never needed to come trusting for forgiveness. He needed no forgiveness. If baptism were a way of securing salvation,
then Jesus could not be our example in baptism.
But since baptism is a token of heart surrender to the soul-saving work
of the Lord and pointing toward the death, burial and resurrection of Christ,
then Christ could be our example in baptism.
So He was baptized and immediately the Holy Spirit came on Him in an
anointing for His ministry and so we may be baptized like Christ and receive
the gift of the Holy Ghost, as Acts 2:38 says.”
-John R. Rice, Filled With the Spirit, The Book of Acts: A Verse-by-Verse
Commentary, Sword of the Lord; 1963, 1973.
Paige
Patterson
“Unfortunately,
some read the verse [Acts 2:38] to mean that obedience to the act of baptism
somehow brings about salvation. But
neither this verse, nor the New Testament as a whole, assigns saving efficacy
to the waters of baptism. The
misunderstood term in the verse is the preposition ‘for’ in the expression ‘for
the remission of sins.’ This preposition
has various nuances in English. If you
were asked, for example, ‘Did you go to the store for your wife?’ there are
several conceivable meanings. Did you go
to a store to select your wife? Or did
she, as your wife, call from the store for you to come and get her? Or did she simply request that you go to the
store in her place and fetch a loaf of bread?
The
Greek preposition eis, translated here as ‘for,’ also has numerous
nuances. Does the verse mean that a
person is to repent and to be baptized for (i.e., in order to obtain)
forgiveness of sin? Or does the verse
mean that forgiveness of sin is the provision that leads to repentance? Then the word ‘for’ would be read ‘repent and
let everyone of you be Baptized for (i.e., because of) the remission of
sins already fully provided by Christ on the cross.’ This last sense is the proper
understanding. For example, in Matthew
12:41, the men of Nineveh are said to have repented ‘at (in Greek the same word
eis) the preaching of Jonah.’ They
repented because of the preaching of the prophet! In the same way, because of the atonement of
Jesus, all are called to repent and to follow Jesus in baptism.” -Paige Patterson, What Is Baptism?,
Seminary Hill Press, SWBTS; 2011.
John
B. Polhill
“The
connection of baptism with the forgiveness of sins in v. 38 [Acts 2:38] has
often been a matter of controversy. A
literal rendering of the verse runs:
‘Repent, and let each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for/on
the basis of the forgiveness of your sins.’ The disputed word is the
preposition eis, which could indicate purpose and thus be taken to mean that
baptism is the prerequisite for the forgiveness of sins. There is ample evidence in the New Testament,
however, that eis can also mean on the ground of, on the basis of,
which would indicate the opposite relationship – that the forgiveness of sins
is the basis, the grounds for being baptized.
Perhaps more significant, however, is that the usual connection of the
forgiveness of sins in Luke-Acts is with repentance and not with baptism at all
(cf. Luke 24:47; Acts 3:19; 5:31). In
fact, in no other passage of Acts is baptism presented as bringing about the
forgiveness of sins. If not linked with
repentance, forgiveness is connected with faith (cf. Acts 10:43; 13:38f.;
26:18). The dominant idea in [Acts] 2:38
thus seems to be repentance, with the other elements following. Repentance leads to baptism, the forgiveness
of sins, and the gift of the Spirit. The
essential response Peter called from the Jewish crowd is the complete turnabout
that comprises true repentance, to turn away from their rejection of the
Messiah and to call upon his name, receive baptism into his community, and
share the gift of the Spirit they had just witnessed so powerfully at work in
the Christians at Pentecost. Peter
concluded his appeal with a promise, the promise of Joel 2:32 (cf. v. 21):
‘Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.’ The universal scope of the promise is
emphasized. Salvation is not only for
the group of Jews present at Pentecost but for future generations (‘your
children’) as well. It is not only for
Jews but for Gentiles, for those ‘who are far off.’ -John B. Polhill, Acts, The New
American Commentary, Broadman Press (B&H); 1992.
Bob
L. Ross
“Only
a baptismal remissionist thinks that Acts 2:38 means a literal baptismal
remission. The evangelical, holding that
literal remission came in the death of Christ, and that experimental remission
comes by faith (Acts 10:43), stands on the ground that the only remission to be
found in baptism is a declarative, ceremonial, representative one – the same
sense as the body and blood of Christ are in the bread and wine of the Lord’s
Supper.” -Bob L. Ross, Acts
2:38 and Baptismal Remission, Pilgrim Publications, Pasadena, TX; 1976,
1987.
J.
B. Jeter
“That
baptism is for the remission of sins none will deny. But the import of the passage turns on the
force of the term ‘for.’ In Greek the
preposition eis is used. Every
scholar knows, and every intelligent reader may learn from unquestionable
authority, that it bears in the New Testament various meanings. It is sometimes, but rarely, rendered for,
in the sense of, ‘in order to.’
Its usual rendering is into.
A regard to the context, the sense of the passage, and other
considerations, must determine its import in any particular place. It is only necessary to show that on sound
principles of hermeneutics, it may be fairly understood in harmony with what I
have endeavored to prove is the plain doctrine of the Scriptures, and this can
easily be done.
In
Matthew 3:11, we have these words – ‘I indeed baptize you with water unto (eis)
repentance.’ Here the term cannot
without gross impropriety be rendered for, or in order to. We know that John did not baptize his
disciples in order that they might repent.
He demanded of them not only repentance, but fruits meet for repentance,
before he admitted them to baptism. He
baptized them, not that they might obtain repentance, but as a sign, or
acknowledgment that they had repented.
Matthew 3:8-9.
Now,
in the very sense in which the Harbinger baptized his disciples (eis) unto,
for, into repentance, did Peter command his Pentecostal hearers
to be baptized (eis) for, unto, into the remission
of sins – that is, not to procure, but as a sign, or acknowledgment of, this
privilege, which God has graciously and inseparably united with repentance and
faith. I could produce many similar
examples, but this will suffice to show how fairly the passage harmonizes with
the symbolic theory of baptism.” -J.
B. Jeter, Campbellism Examined, Sheldon, Lamport, & Blakeman;
1855. Jeter (AD 1802-1880) was a Baptist
Pastor, author, and editor of the Religious Herald, Virginia.
B.
H. Carroll
“We
will now consider a frequent meaning of eis, also determined by local
context, in the following still more pertinent passage, for in it we have the
verb, baptize, as well as the preposition, eis (Matt. 3:11): ‘I
indeed baptize you in water eis repentance.’ All the context shows that John
required repentance, and even its fruits, as a condition precedent to baptism.
It would be foolish to render it, ‘I baptize you in order to repentance.’ Here
the preposition has not its ordinary meaning, in order to, nor its rare
meaning, because of, but its frequent meaning, with reference to – a repentance
that they had exercised. ‘I baptize you with reference to that exercising of
it,’ is what John means. Or, as Tyndale, in his version (it was a very fine
version for his time) says, ‘I baptize you in token of repentance.’ That makes
fine sense…
We
may apply the ad hominern argument to our Campbellite brethren. They
evade the many cases of remission through faith and without baptism, in the
life of our Lord, by saying, ‘The law of pardon was not given till Pentecost.’
How, then, do they dispose of Mark 1:4 and Luke 3:3, paralleling remission
under the preaching of John the Baptist with the preaching of Peter at
Pentecost in Acts 2:38? John baptized eis aphesin hamartion, exactly
paralleling what Peter did in Acts 2:38. Then, briefly, the meaning of eis in
Acts 2:38 is this: Repent ye – plural, and a strong imperative – ‘and let every
one of you who has repented be baptized’ – a mild imperative – ‘in the name of
Jesus Christ eis aphesin hamartion’ – with reference to remission of
sins.” -B. H. Carroll (AD
1843-1914), An Interpretation of the English Bible, Broadman Press;
1948.
B.
H. Carroll
has an excellent, extensive discussion of Acts 2:38 in his An Interpretation
of the English Bible, Edited by J. B. Cranfill, Broadman; 1948. It is available both in book form and on the
internet.
To
Him all the prophets witness that, through His name, whoever believes in Him
will receive remission of sins. -Peter; Acts 10:43
-David
R. Brumbelow, gulfcoastpastor.blogspot.com, August 12, AD 2019.
Other Articles:
More
Articles in lower right margin.
