What Baptism did you receive?

John’s baptism in water does not save the unbeliever. Water baptism, as practised by John the Baptist, was a baptism of repentance, not salvation. When John came baptising in the Jordan River, the means of salvation had not yet come—the blood of Christ had not yet been shed. Some choose to abuse the prophetic language conveyed in the baptism texts by amalgamating the two baptisms into one that serves as a legalistic framework to judge the saved and the unsaved

The entire ministry of John the Baptist was a prophetic statement, a “type” that pointed forward to Christ, the one who would bring true salvation through the baptism of the Holy Spirit. Here lies the key distinction between the Old Covenant sign of repentance and the New Testament Covenant doctrine of salvation. John himself makes this point plainly in Matthew 3:11:

“I baptize you with water for repentance. But after me comes one who is more powerful than I... He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire.”

No mention of water immersion is made, so why has the signpost become the destination? Why has full water immersion become the archetype of salvation today, especially among Baptists and similar traditions, when John’s own words confront and deny any such conclusion?

John’s baptism pointed forward to a greater reality: a baptism not of water, but of the Spirit—not by works, but by faith. This is the baptism that results in spiritual death and rebirth—what Jesus calls being “born again” (John 3:3-7). Under the Old Covenant, John's baptism symbolised repentance and a return to obedience under the Law. But under the New Covenant, baptism signifies a new creation, born in Christ through the Holy Spirit (Acts 19:1-6).

In the times of the Law, holiness was man’s responsibility—Man choose to obey it. Under the New Covenant, salvation is God’s initiative. He saves us not through rituals or physical signs, but through grace—by His authority, not ours. He honours our faith in Christ, and the Holy Spirit testifies to that belief (Romans 8:16). Salvation does not occur because we follow a ceremonial act, but because we unite with Christ through faith. Sadly, some continue to teach an Old Testament approach to salvation, placing weight on external expressions rather than the internal, regenerating work of the Spirit.

John and Jesus made it clear that John’s baptism was symbolic—a preparatory act. Like Old Testament prophecy, it pointed to fulfilment in Christ. Yet today, many continue to cradle water baptism in a manner bordering on idolatry, judging salvation by it, even placing it within doctrinal statements as a requirement for membership, leadership, or validation of one's faith. This is deeply problematic.

Jesus Christ died for all humanity, not just those who chose to believe (John 3:16-17). However, only those who respond in faith are justified, set apart, and sealed in Christ. The Holy Spirit becomes a deposit, guaranteeing that salvation (Ephesians 1:13-14). Our sins still exist in this world, but the punishment for them is swallowed up in Christ. John’s baptism of water does NOT cover our sins—only the blood of Jesus does.

Many churches, however, continue to teach full water immersion as the first and primary sign of salvation. Membership often hinges on it. Yet Scripture testifies clearly that two distinct baptisms exist: one of water, the other of the Spirit (John 3:5-7; Acts 19:2-5). The difference is not merely symbolic—how we exegete foundational principles determines our consistency with sound doctrine.

Let me be clear: I am not against water baptism. It can be a meaningful public declaration of an inner reality—but I would argue it comes after salvation, not as a requirement to obtain it. If we teach that salvation depends on the act of water baptism, we teach a false doctrine. In other words, if we suggest that “unless you are baptised in water, you are not saved,” we replace grace with ritual, and Christ with tradition.

As already stated, salvation should precede any public declaration of it. Water immersion should never be used to establish salvation, determine church membership, or be idolised in “statements of faith.”

Following is an extract of the contradiction: a current “Statement of Faith” from a Church that reads as follows:

“Only those who have been baptized by full immersion in water may be members, vote, or serve.”

This kind of declaration reveals a deeper problem. The fact that any church feels the need to define salvation through a man-made statement of faith is concerning in itself. Such statements are prone to human error and become tools for enforcing false doctrines as religious sacraments. Worse still, the sacrament becomes the gatekeeper of salvation. The church, not Christ, determines who is saved, who can lead, who can vote, and who can speak.

At that point, the Church ceases to reflect the body of Christ and begins to function like a religious bureaucracy—one that mimics the very legalism Jesus came to free us from. Ironically, such structures often resemble the political systems they claim to resist. This is how democracies slide into totalitarianism—when beliefs are enforced through power, rather than received by grace, through faith.

The following example of a Church statement of faith demonstrates the contradictory nature of many common beliefs today. This is a current statement of faith, and while it may have good intentions, it doesn't stand up to scrutiny. That any Church sees a need for statements of faith is concerning in the first place, because, quite frankly, they're open to manipulation, and openly install a false doctrine as a religious sacrament. The sacrament then decides who is saved, who is not, and who will be recognised by the Church. In essence, the Church becomes the judge of its doctrine. We often see this in who has the authority to vote about decisions, who can serve as leaders, who can speak, who decides on doctrine, and so on. I might add that this is how democracies move into totalitarianism.

A Church Statement of Faith:

1. The atonement made on the Cross by our Lord for the sin of the world.

2. The person of the Holy Spirit is the one who sanctifies and sets apart, empowers and imparts spiritual gifts to the church.

3. The inspiration of the Bible and its authority in all matters of faith and practice.

4. Salvation is by faith in Jesus Christ alone.

5. Membership of the church is for those who have received salvation.

6. The immersion of believers is the only scriptural form of baptism

Points 1-4 are core tenets of Christianity, but points 5 and 6 have implications for points 1-4. If we want an example of how a little yeast leavens the whole dough, then here we have it. This statement of faith is absolute, and therein absolutely contradictory, because it claims authority by making absolute truth statements. Point 6 contradicts point 2 because the Holy Spirit was not setting anyone apart under John’s baptism in water, and point 6 is essentially telling the Holy Spirit that water immersion is the only means through which his sanctification will be recognised. Point 5 contradicts point 4 because membership is determined by those saved under point 6 alone. Point 4 contradicts point 6 because salvation by faith will not be recognised without water immersion. Membership is thus decided by the evidence of water immersion, not faith. If salvation is by faith (point 4), water immersion (point 6), is unnecessary. Point 6 contradicts point 3 because water immersion in the New Testament is not stated as the means of salvation. Lastly, the wording of point 6 embeds a religious sacrament, which contradicts point 2. It can be argued that the tension in these statements undermines and blasphemes the work of the Holy Spirit. Now I could carry on with this deconstruction, but these are some of the difficulties created when we install false doctrine, as sacraments for the Church.

Historically, the most obvious explanation for the beginnings and continuation of water immersion was to control the religious enterprise. Over time, it became a rite of passage into the Church and subtly implied that authority resided in the water. Because a sacrament has certain key requirements for it to be validated, and only the Church could perform them, the early Roman Church decided to maintain control over those under its authority. The spirit behind this is idolatry, and it's been passed down in its various forms through many denominations. It continues to illustrate that after 2000 years, the Church is still subject to rules and laws that find no justification in the biblical corpus. While salvation theology has evolved, the same spirit undermines the heart of Christianity through statements such as this. We love elders to lead us, and authority figures to be God's voice for us. We love the church as an institution, a building, one that’s often described as holy ground. The human condition behind this reverence is not significantly different from the situation Samuel confronted at the end of his life:

1 Samual 8:4-8, “So all the elders of Israel gathered together, and came to Samuel at Ramah. They said to him, "You are old, and your sons do not follow your ways; now appoint a king to lead us, such as all the other nations have." But when they said, "Give us a king to lead us," this displeased Samuel; so he prayed to the LORD. And the LORD told him: "Listen to all that the people are saying to you; it is not you they have rejected, but they have rejected me as their king. As they have done from the day I brought them up out of Egypt until this day, forsaking me and serving other gods, so they are doing to you”.

Over the years, I’ve observed the actions of many leaders who've manipulated the simplicity of salvation. The focus on water conflates the occasion to such an extent that it’s often difficult to see the work of the Holy Spirit. From my observation, the evidence of real change is not evident, and many drift into a form of religion without its power, and this gradually fades and dies. The decline of the Western church should be a wake-up call, but this doesn't seem to stir a seared conscience. In recent years, some Churches have attempted to replace older leaders with younger leaders to grow the Church. Again, this is not a biblical approach to Christianity and smacks of a corporate-like approach to success. We apply mathematical equations to justify spending large sums of money as if this will grow the Church, and in doing so, deny the power of God.

As far as I can tell, many of today’s young Christians are spiritually immature and reliant on peer-driven significance. Their faith is like a seed that falls on rocky ground (Mk 4:4-5), and many are grieving their parents. Indeed, if we open our eyes, there’s little evidence of spiritual growth following water baptisms. This is more consistent with lives absent the power of God. It appears more like the evidence of those who never received the Holy Spirit because they never had “saving faith” to begin with. For those who may doubt the veracity of this statement, look around and read the biblical stories about the weeds and the wheat. The truth might be worth considering. This situation is not peculiar to our generation either; many examples are illustrated in the New Testament.

The scriptures clearly state that a person is saved by the grace of God, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ, AND BY OUR CHOOSING TO BELIEVE in HIM, by faith. The subsequent baptism of God’s Spirit follows the decision WE make. There is no biblical evidence to suggest that a person is saved by any form of water immersion, including the baptism of the Ethiopian in Acts 8:27-40. A study of vs 8:35 is inherently subjective, and the meaning of vs 36 is dependent on our interpretation of the former. Further, vs 8:37, which might have held some argument, is being left out of newer translations because earlier manuscripts suggest verse 37 was added to the narrative as late as the 6th century. This brings the reason and motive into question. Therefore, at best, the text “might” suggest the Ethiopian was saved, but equally it could suggest he received only the baptism of John (repentance). Either way, the narrative is not sufficiently conclusive to be used as a rebuttal in its own right.

We know that the scriptures suggest a person who exercises "saving faith" receives salvation at that point, and often before any formal expression, not as a result of the public expression. Abraham did not become a friend of God through circumcision, but because he believed, and THEN it was credited to him, as faith. The Apostle Paul was saved without water, and the evidence was in his actions. No one becomes a child of God through a ritual, without first believing in faith, and no one needs a ritual to justify acceptance in faith. The purpose of Jesus Christ was completed at THE RESURRECTION. Salvation is entirely down to what we do with it; it’s our choice to believe. The ultimate deception of a religious sacrament is that WE DO NOTHING, and perhaps this is the problem.

Reading

John 3:1-15, Matt 3:11-12, Acts 9:1-18, Acts 19:1-6, 1 Peter3:21-22 and Romans 6:1-3