THE WHOLE TRUTH ABOUT BAPTISM.

Are We Teaching the Whole Truth About Baptism?
Gary Henry
Baptism is an important subject. Popular misconcep-tions about the who, what, and why of baptism occupy a great deal of our attention as we discuss the Bible with our friends and neighbors. Very often it is necessary to emphasize the scriptural teaching that baptism is for the remission of sins (Ac. 2:38; 22:16; 1 Pt. 3:21). We frequently find ourselves stressing the importance of the fact that for baptism to be scriptural, it must honor the purpose of that act as taught in the Scriptures.
But what is the purpose of baptism in the Scriptures? What must be understood by the candidate in order for baptism to be what God intended it to be? The baptism that culminates one's initial obedience to the gospel and completes what must be done to be "in Christ" (Rom. 6:3,4; Gal. 3:27; Col. 2:12) is an act that looks forward as well as backward. In that it is for the remission of past sins, it certainly does look backward; but in that it is a commitment to live for Christ, it also looks forward. Paul wrote plainly, "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" (Rom. 6:4). In studying with others, do we emphasize this forward-looking commitment of scriptural baptism as much as we emphasize the backward-looking truth that it is for the remission of sins? Are we teaching the whole truth about baptism?
Given the high mortality rate of new Christians among us, one might wonder whether we are doing a very good job of imparting to others a full-orbed understanding of what baptism is all about. In many places, those who have been "baptized" fall away at an alarming rate. The pattern is all-too-familiar: a person who seems very "receptive" is quickly taught, and after only a study session or two, the individual seems eager to be baptized. Lest the person rush into baptism with unscriptural ideas in mind about it, we take the time to emphasize that baptism is for the remission of sins. We may go so far as to insist that, just prior to the act, whoever does the baptizing say the actual words that baptism is "for the remission of sins." But very little is said, and very few questions are asked of the candidate, to make sure he or she understands the commitment that is involved in scriptural baptism. Certainly nothing is said about the disciplinary action that must take place if the person ever repudiates that commitment (2 Thess. 3:6-15). So, after attending only a few of the assemblies of the church, the person is never seen again. After a few months go by, someone suggests that we simply "delete his name from the directory." Easy come, easy go. And all of this among a people who have virtually majored in the study of what baptism is supposed to mean. However much we may understand about Rom. 6:4, the evidence suggests that we are not communicating it very well to others!
Let us be reminded that there is no true "conversion" to Christ if no real commitment is made as one takes the familiar steps that are required by the gospel (Ac. 3:19; Rom. 6:17,18). Not only is commitment a part of scriptural baptism, it is also a part of scriptural faith, repentance, and confession. Each one of these actions (when done from the heart and for scriptural reasons) implies the making of a pledge of faithfulness to Christ, a promise to live for Him forever afterward (Heb. 10:23). In encouraging Timothy to be strong and not allow his commitment to weaken, Paul wrote, "Fight the good fight of faith, lay hold on eternal life, to which you were also called and have confessed the good confession in the presence of many witnesses" (1 Tim. 6:12). Why remind Timothy that he had publicly confessed Christ? Surely it was to say, "Timothy, don't ever go back on the pledge of fidelity you've made each time you've confessed Christ before others. Remember your public promise -- and don't ever go back on it!"
When we say that someone has become "unfaithful" to the Lord, do we understand what we are saying? "Unfaithfulness" is virtually the same word as "infidelity." Both words describe the situation of one who has "broken faith" with a previous pledge. They have to do with far more than the changing of one's mind at the theoretical level; more importantly, they have to do with the violation of one's commitment at the practical level. They mean that a person has gone back on a "bona fide" agreement that was made. And nothing less than this takes place when one becomes "unfaithful" following baptism. The promise that is broken is the most serious promise a human being is capable of making, and the violation of one's commitment at baptism is the most serious breach of faith possible in this world (2 Pt. 2:20-22).
These truths, sobering as they are, need to be clearly enunciated when we are teaching the gospel to the lost. Commitments lightly entered into are lightly broken. How much better it is for those ready to rejoice in the remission of their sins to be candidly advised of the commitment they are about to make. To teach the whole truth about baptism, we must help people to count the cost of their discipleship. We dare not leave out "first principles" passages like this one: "No one, having put his hand to the plow, and looking back, is fit for the kingdom of God" (Lk. 9:62).