Baptism
The Washing Away of Our Sins

Does Infant Baptism Initiate or Guarantee Salvation?

    We must fact one other important subject related especially to the baptism of children. Many parents believe or have been taught that the baptism of an infant initiates or guarantees salvation for that infant. For example, during the church age many Lutheran churches taught that the baptism of their young children guaranteed that that child has been placed into the Kingdom of God.
    Unfortunately, they had fallen into the same snare that the Old Testament church fell into. The Old Testament church, to a high degree, believed that if a Jew was circumcised in the flesh, he was guaranteed a secure place in God's kingdom.
    But, as we learned earlier, no physical act on our part can ever give substance to our salvation. The whole action of salvation is entirely God's action. Water baptism can never be more than a shadow or type, because it is an act that we perform. This is such a significant principle that we must examine it a bit longer.
    There is one verse in the Bible that many who practiced infant baptism stumble upon. It is Romans 4:11, which discussed the salvation of Abraham. It is worded in such a way that it is very easy to come to an unbiblical conclusion concerning the nature of baptism. This verse declares:

    As we read this verse, it appears to clearly state that the physical act of circumcision was a seal of the righteousness of faith which Abraham manifested. Since the rite of circumcision in the Old Testament was replaced by the water baptism in the New, many churches teach, therefore, that baptism is a sign and a seal of

salvation. Consequently, the idea is strongly conveyed that water baptism is more than a sign or shadow of salvation; it is also a seal that relates to salvation. This conclusion has very serious consequences and thus it is a question that we must examine very thoroughly. Does this verse teach that water baptism is a seal?

    God's usage of the word "seal" is very clearly related to a guarantee as we shall discover as we continue this study. And any guarantee of our salvation has to be entirely God's work. Physical baptism is a work that we do, and therefore it cannot be substantive in any way in connection with our salvation.
    Having incorrectly understood the guaranteeing nature of the "seal," many believers, therefore, truly believe that even though salvation is by grace alone without any of man's work, yet water baptism somehow does become a guarantee of future salvation for their children.

    Thus, even though they will loudly protest that works have no part in the salvation of their children, they very much like the phrase that water baptism is a sign and a seal.
    This matter then becomes of utmost importance.

Does Infant Baptism Initiate or Guarantee Salvation?

    As we study this question, we should look at Romans 4:11 very carefully. It is speaking of circumcision which, as we have seen, is the Old Testament equivalent of New Testament baptism.

    When we read Romans 4:11 more carefully, we should note that it is not teaching that physical circumcision of Abraham was a seal of any kind any more than water baptism is a seal. Let us see why this is so.
    We learned earlier that whenever we read the word "baptism" in the Bible, we can not know from that word alone whether water baptism (physical baptism) or baptism with the Holy Spirit (spiritual baptism) is in view. Only by carefully examining the context in which the word "baptism" is used can we know if physical or spiritual baptism is in view.
    Furthermore, we learned that if the word "baptism" is used as a condition for salvation, or as a part of salvation, we always know that spiritual baptism is in view. This is so because physical baptism can never be more than a sign or shadow pointing to or representing spiritual baptism which is totally the work of God.

    Moreover, we learned that a great many theologians see the word "baptism" and immediately think of water baptism. Thus, they arrive at wrong conclusions concerning the nature of salvation. They frequently end up with doctrines that emphasize that the work of baptizing in water is either a condition for salvation, or it guarantees salvation, or somehow is a part of the salvation process.
    The same rules and warnings that apply to the word "baptism" also precisely apply to the word "circumcision." In fact, ancient Israel always applied the word circumcision to physical circumcision, and thus, arrived at the completely wrong doctrine that physical circumcision guaranteed salvation.
    Unfortunately, in our day, the same error is frequently made by theologians. They read Romans 4:11, "And he received the sign of circumcision, a seal of righteousness of the faith." They

believe the word "circumcision' in this phrase is physical circumcision. They, therefore, believe that physical circumcision was the seal of the faith of Abraham. And since the rite of circumcision has been replaced by the rite of baptism in the New Testament, they conclude that physical baptism must, likewise, be understood to be a seal of the righteousness of faith in the life of the one who is baptized.

    The conclusion that physical baptism (water baptism) is a seal is an impossible conclusion. This is so because the word "seal" applies to a completed fact. We read in Ephesians 1:13-14:

    The word seal is used here to indicate that our inheritance is guaranteed if we have become saved. At the moment of salvation the Holy Spirit gives the believer a new resurrected soul in which he has eternal life. This wonderful fact, together with the fact that the Holy Spirit begins to indwell that person, is a seal or guarantee that God will complete the salvation of that individual.

    In these verses, God declares that to be sealed with the Holy Spirit in an earnest or guarantee that we will receive the inheritance. In similar fashion, we read in Ephesians 4:30:

    What a great promise and guarantee these are! In similar fashion, in John 6:27 we read that Christ was sealed by God the Father indicating that our salvation is guaranteed in Him. In Matthew 27:66, the sepulcher was sealed indicating that all the power and authority of the Roman government would make certain that no one could open the grave in which Jesus was buried.
    These few examples are given to show that the word "seal" has great substance. Therefore, physical circumcision can never been looked upon as a seal inasmuch as it has no salvation substance. Only spiritual circumcision has salvation substance.
    Then how are we to understand Romans 4:11? The solution is to remember that the word "circumcision" like the word "baptism" normally refers to spiritual circumcision unless the context clearly dictates physical circumcision. When we examine Romans 4:11 very carefully, we will see that only spiritual circumcision can be in view.
    Therefore, when we look again at Romans 4:11, we must understand the verse to effectively say, "And Abraham received the sign of circumcision (that is, the sign of spiritual circumcision), which (spiritual) circumcision was a seal of the righteousness of faith which he had when he was uncircumcised (that is, which he had before he was physically circumcised in the flesh)." Thus, this verse is teaching that before Abraham experienced physical circumcision, he already had become spiritually circumcised (that is, his sins had already been cut off, indicating that he had already become saved). This spiritual circumcision was a seal or guarantee that he had become righteous before God; he had become saved.
    The verse then teaches that after he had become saved, he received the sign of spiritual circumcision by becoming physically circumcised. Physical circumcision was a sign pointing to spiritual

circumcision, the spiritual circumcision being the seal of the righteousness of faith.
    In fact, in Romans 4:8-12, God uses the word "circumcision" or "uncircumcision" eleven times without indicating whether physical circumcision or spiritual circumcision is in view. When we read these verses carefully in the light of the rest of the Bible, we can know that we are to understand them as follows:

    We might paraphrase these verses as follows:
"Cometh this blessedness of salvation upon the Jews only who had been physically circumcised, or upon the Gentiles also, who had not been physically circumcised? For we say that faith (the faith of Christ in saving him) was counted to Abraham for righteousness. How was it then counted? When he had become a Jew as attested to by the fact that he had become physically circumcised, or when he was still a Gentile and had not yet received physical circumcision? Not as a Jew who had received physical circumcision but as a Gentile who had not yet received physical circumcision. He received physical circumcision as a sign of his spiritual circumcision (salvation), his salvation or spiritual circumcision being a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had when he was still a Gentile and had not been physically

circumcised: that he might be the father of all them that believe though they be Gentiles and not having received physical circumcision as had the Jews; that righteousness might be imputed to the Gentiles also, and the father of salvation which is spiritual circumcision to them who are Gentiles who have not been physically circumcised and are not of the Jews who have been physically circumcised only, but who also walk in the steps of that faith of our father Abraham which he had when he was a Gentile who had not been physically circumcised."
    Thus, even as it is the spiritual circumcision (the salvation) of Abraham that was the seal or guarantee of his righteousness so, too, it is our salvation (baptism or washing away of our sins), that is the guarantee of our righteousness. Physical or water baptism can never be a seal. Surely it is a sign or shadow of our salvation but never a seal of our salvation.

Baptism Has No Salvation Substance

    The matter of water baptism being a sign or shadow and not having salvation substance is so important that we should develop this principle a bit further. First of all, what do we mean when we say that baptism has no salvation substance? To understand this, we must think again of the basic facts concerning the unsaved. We must clearly recognize that before we are saved, we are spiritually dead. We are just as spiritually dead as Lazarus of John 11 was physically dead. He was a stinking corpse with no possibility of any physical life within him.
    Yet when Jesus commanded, "Lazarus, come forth" (John 11:43), Lazarus did come out of the tomb, physically alive. What contribution did Lazarus make to regaining his physical life so that he could obey Christ's command? The answer, of course, is completely obvious. He absolutely could make no contribution. Not even the slightest contribution. Therefore, when Jesus commanded this stinking corpse to come out of the tomb, He also had to give this corpse physical life, and hearing, and a will, and strength to respond to His command. Lazarus could take no credit whatsoever for the fact that he came out of the tomb alive in response to Jesus' command.

    The raising of Lazarus is a dramatic picture of our salvation. Before we are saved, we are as spiritually dead as Lazarus was physically dead. Lazarus was commanded to come out of the tomb. We who are spiritually dead are commanded to believe in Christ, to repent, and to become saved.

    But even as Lazarus in himself could never come to physical life, so we in ourselves can never obey the command to become saved. Even as Jesus did all the work in raising Lazarus, so God must do all the work to give us salvation. We read in Ephesians 2:1-4:

    It, too, lucidly underscores that all of the work of saving as done by Christ.
    This passage very plainly parallels the account of the physical raising of Lazarus. Thus, we can know there is no work of any kind that we can do to get ourselves saved. We must rely entirely on God to do the saving. He must provide for every aspect of our salvation. He must make us aware of our sinful condition. He must make us aware of the certainty of eternal damnation as the penalty for our

sins. He must give us faith that He alone can save us. He alone must accomplish the miracle of salvation within us by washing away our sins and giving us a new resurrected soul.
    In other words, we can say that every aspect of our salvation that that has substance is only and altogether the word of God. We can never boast that we did this or that and thus became prepared to become saved. We can never boast that it was this or that action that we performed which caused God to save us. Every aspect of our salvation is that performed by God as He saved us.

The Seventh-Day Sabbath

    To underscore this exceedingly important truth, at the very beginning of time, God introduced a command that was a sign pointing to this eternally important truth. The sign was the seventh-day Sabbath. After God worked six days to create the universe, He rested the seventh day. He then gave much further information concerning this Sabbath rest when He gave Moses the law on Mount Sinai. So important was this ceremonial command that God made it a part of the ten commandments.
    In Exodus 20, God gave the reason for remembering the seventh day in which no work of any kind was to be done. It was because God rested from His work of creation on the seventh day. But in Deuteronomy 5, where God gave the second account of the ten commandments, God gave another reason why no work was to be done on the seventh day, God declares in Deuteronomy 5:15:

    What is the meaning of this? We must recall that the enslavement of Israel in Egypt under the tyranny of pharaoh is a portrait of our spiritual condition before we become saved. Being in Egypt is a picture of being under the bondage of sin and being enslaved to Satan who is typically by pharaoh. That is why in both accounts (Exodus 20 and Deuteronomy 5), God addresses the ten

commandments to those whom God has brought out of the house of Egypt, from the house of bondage (Deuteronomy 5:6). That is, it is addressed to those who believe they have been saved.
    In other words, God expects the ten commandments to be obeyed in the lives of those whom He has saved. This principle is further emphasized by the fourth commandment wherein God underscores the truth that it was God who brought Israel out of Egypt by His mighty hand and stretched-out arm. It was entirely the work of God in saving Israel from Egypt. It was entirely by His strength; Israel could take no credit whatsoever for the physical salvation from enslavement in Egypt. Thus, God is teaching that the work of saving us is entirely the work of God. We can make no contribution. The same truth shines through exactly as we learned from the account of the raising of Lazarus.
    To underscore the teaching of the fourth commandment, God further declares in Exodus 31:13-17:

    Notice verse 13, where God declares, "that ye may know that I am the LORD that doth sanctify you." Then note verse 14, where God says that the Sabbath is holy and that anyone who defiles it "shall surely be put to death." This solemn warning is underscored as it is repeated in verse 15.

    In verses 16 and 17, God makes the point that the seventh-day sign between God and man is to be observed perpetually, that is, forever. It is an everlasting sign.
    In these verses, God is emphasizing an exceedingly important law. The law is that it is God alone who has provided for our salvation. We are not to countenance for even a moment the idea that our work or our effort has helped to save us. Throughout eternity future (forever), we will know that the work of saving us was entirely God's work.

The Seventh-Day Sabbath: A Ceremonial Law

    So important is this principle that God placed the ceremonial law concerning the seventh-day Sabbath within the Decalogue.
    The seventh-day Sabbath was an Old Testament sign of ceremonial law that pointed to the fact that we are not to attempt any work to become saved. Rather, we are to trust entirely on the work Christ did to save us.
    Like all the other ceremonial laws that God gave in the Old Testament, which pointed to various aspects of salvation, the seventh-day Sabbath is no longer to be physically observed even as we are not to observe burnt offerings, blood sacrifices, or the Passover. God assures us of this by His statement of Colossians 2:16-17:

    Please note that despite the tremendous emphasis on keeping these Old Testament laws, God calls them shadows. That is, they

are signs pointing not that which is very substantive, which is the work Christ did in saving us. The signs themselves, which were to be strictly observed before the time of the cross, were shadows. Therefore, they in themselves made no contribution to our salvation. They in themselves had no salvation or spiritual substance. However, throughout the New Testament era, we are to be reminded constantly of the seventh-day Sabbath sign as it warns that our salvation is completely the work of Christ, and we are not to think for a moment that any work we do or any effort we expend can be credited toward our salvation.

    This is the reason why it is so spiritually healthy to repeatedly read the ten commandments. When we read the fourth commandment, we are not receiving an instruction as to how we are to observe God's holy day, the New Testament Sabbath. On the day Christ arose from the grave, He indicated the era of physically observing the seventh-day Sabbath had come to an end, but that Sunday was the beginning of the new era of Sabbaths. Those Sunday Sabbaths are not signs or shadows; God explains in Isaiah 58:13 that they are God's Holy Day and are not to be used in any way to pursue our will or our pleasure (See the booklet, "Sunday: The Sabbath," which can be obtained from Family Radio). Rather, as we read about the seventh-day Sabbath we are receiving the insistent reminder that no work we do can ever be part of the salvation process. The good works we do after we are saved are simply the evidence that God has done the work in saving us.

Picking Up Sticks

    The extreme importance of the law of God concerning the seventh-day Sabbath observance is highlighted by an incident recorded in Numbers 15. From that account, we learn that there was

an Israelite who gathered sticks on the Sabbath day. This was indeed a very minor infraction of law that decreed that there was to be no work done on the Sabbath. He picked up some sticks. He did not make a fire. He did not build anything. In every other way this man kept the Sabbath. Surely the energy he expended in gathering sticks was probably very minor. Perhaps he was afraid someone else might get those sticks before he claimed them. We do not know why he did this.
    Then Moses asked God what penalty should be assessed against this man who so slightly violated the Sabbath day command. God gave specific judgment. Numbers 15:35 records:

    The command of God was so insistent that we read in verse 36:

    Why would God record this traumatic incident? Surely it is to underscore the spiritual truth. If we try in any way to add our work to the work which Christ did to save us, we are still subject to the judgment of God. It is a tremendous warning that we are saved by grace alone. We must never countenance any doctrine that makes our effort or work, however small it may be, something that assisted with our salvation.

    With this solemn warning in our ears, people who believe that they became saved because they accepted Jesus should tremble with fear. And so should those who believe that water baptism is a condition that had to be met to become saved, and those who believe that they had to become worthy or good enough to become saved. Any and all of these doctrines or practices put these people in the same danger as the man who picked up sticks on the Sabbath. The people who hold these ideas are still subject to the wrath of God.

The Old Testament Signs That Were Observed Were Never Called Seals

    That brings us back to the question of water baptism and the Lord's Supper being seals as well as signs. Significantly, the tremendously important laws concerning the seventh-day Sabbath were never called a seal. We should be impressed by the many references that teach the importance of not doing any work on that day. Yet repeatedly they were called a sign and in the New Testament a shadow. They were never called a seal.
    Likewise, all of the other important laws concerning things such as feast days, sacrifices, the Passover, etc., are never called seals, but they are called a shadow in Colossians 2:17. Indeed, we read in Hebrews 10:1:

    This passage again emphasizes that these important ceremonial laws are shadows.
    Why were none of these ever called a seal? Because, as we saw earlier, a seal indicates substance. Ephesians 1:13 says the believer is sealed by the Holy Spirit, which means that an integral part of the work God has done in saving us is that He has sealed us with the indwelling Holy Spirit who already has given the believer eternal

life and a new resurrected soul. This is a guarantee that He will complete our salvation. But it is God who does all the work to save us. We have not made any contribution.
    Thus, we can understand that God never calls water baptism or the Lord's Supper a seal. These are activities that we do which in themselves are shadows or signs that point to glorious aspects of salvation in which God has done all the work.
    Some would agree that water baptism cannot be any kind of seal or guarantee of the salvation of the person baptized. But they argue that water baptism is a seal or guarantee that God will carry out His promises of salvation for the elect of God. Let us examine this assertion.
    The word seal as it is commonly used in connection with agreements is a very legal instrument placed on an agreement by the maker of the agreement. It effectively authenticates the signature of the signer of the agreement, thus guaranteeing that the terms of the agreement will be carried out.
    The agreement that identifies with salvation is the Covenant of Grace. The only signer of that agreement is God Himself, and He authenticates His signature by applying His seal to it. He alone can seal the Covenant because He alone is the maker of the Covenant. No human being can seal that Covenant because humans in no way are the makers of the Covenant.
    Water baptism is an action that we perform; therefore, it in no sense whatsoever can be a seal to any aspect of our salvation.
    I am afraid that those who try so hard to retain the idea that water baptism is a seal are influenced partly because the reformed confessions, such as the Westminster Confession and the Belgic Confession, are held in such high regard. For example, Article 33 of the Belgic Confession declares that the Sacraments (water baptism and the Holy Supper) "are visible signs and seals of an inward and invisible thing, by means whereof God works in us by the power of the Holy Spirit."
    While these Confessions as a whole are accurate declarations of many important truths of the Bible, and have served the church very well for many hundreds of years, we must remember that they are not infallible. They are not inspired by God as is the Bible.

Therefore, we must never forget that they are subject to the authority of the Bible. And the Bible will not countenance the idea that any ceremonial sign or shadow which points to some aspect of salvation can be a seal or guarantee. Never in the Bible is any Old Testament ceremony nor any New Testament ceremony ever called a seal or guarantee. This is because the ceremony is

performed by our action, by our work, which is true of burnt offerings, physical circumcision, blood sacrifices, ceremonial washings, the keeping 0bg cf the Passover and other feast days, water baptism, and the Lord's Supper. All of these are commanded by God but not one is ever spoken of a seal or guarantee. It appears that the authors of the Belgic Confession and the Westminster Confession misunderstood the meaning of Romans 4:11 which we looked at earlier in this study. While they certainly understood very clearly that our work can never contribute to our salvation, they apparently failed to realize that by calling the sacraments seals as well as signs, they were making an aspect of our work a contribution to our salvation.

    Those who hold these very Confessions to be accurate and authoritative demonstrate a definite reluctance to admit that the Confessions may be in error in any point. I am afraid that part of this reluctance is because they definitely do not want the language concerning the Sacraments to be changed in any way. That is, if any

article of the Confession should be changed because it is not as accurate as it should be, then it is possible that the language concerning the ceremonial laws being called signs and seals may be subject to change. Though many often loudly protest that works have not part in the salvation of their children, they very much like the teaching that water baptism is a sign and a seal. They like very much that theses ceremonial laws are called signs and seals because that implies that the act of water baptism somehow is more than a shadow or sign. Somehow it guarantees something spiritually valuable in the life of the one baptized. Many believers who hold to these Confessions and who have a wayward son or daughter trust in the fact that their child has been baptized as an infant. After all, they reason, doesn't the Confession state that the physical act of water baptism is a seal? And isn't a seal some kind of guarantee? Without realizing it, they have moved to the same conclusion as ancient Israel who put their trust in physical circumcision. God warns in Galatians 5:3-4:

    God further explains in Galatians 5:6:

    Even as no work of any kind was to be done on the seventh-day Sabbath, so we are not to do work of any kind to try to be saved. We are to rest entirely in the finished work of Christ. The man who picked up a few sticks is like someone who trusts almost completely in the work of Christ to pay for his sins. But he also believes that his action, slight as it may be, has also made a contribution toward his salvation. He was stoned to death, which means that if we believe any work that we have done has contributed toward our salvation, we are still subject to damnation.

To use the language of Galatians 5:3-4, we have fallen from grace. We are making an action of ours (however small) a condition for salvation.
    This emphasizes the seriousness of calling theses ceremonial laws a seal. We do the work of keeping the sacraments. It is effort we have expended. And therefore, we must be super careful that we put no substance within them. The substance is strictly in the aspect of salvation to which they point. Water baptism points to the need for our sins to be washed away. And that washing is strictly, only, and entirely God's work. Likewise, the Lord's Supper is a shadow or sign that points to the completion of our salvation when the marriage of the bride and the Lamb will be completed in every way.
    Were the Old Testament signs such as the Passover and the seventh-day Sabbath of no consequence? After all, a shadow has no substance. In fact, they were of great importance because they were commanded by God. They were visible reminders of great and wonderful truths concerning salvation.
    Likewise, the New Testament ceremonial laws are commanded by God as visible reminders of great and wonderful truths that relate to salvation.

    They absolutely must not be regarded as seals because seals have substance. Any substance inherent in salvation is always the work of God. Therefore, we should not be surprised that in the Bible, these ceremonial laws are never called a seal. We should be unafraid to take issue with a longstanding Confession of the church wherever it may be in error even though this might bring great criticism from those who insist that we should not change any part of these historic documents.

    Before we leave the subject of theses ceremonial laws not being seals, we must look at one other chapter of the Bible that appears to give aid and comfort to those who like the idea of water baptism and the Lord's Supper being seals.

The Sign of the Covenant: Circumcision

    In regards to circumcision, one of the most easily misunderstood chapters in the Bible is Genesis 17. In this chapter, God sets forth the account of the circumcision of Abraham. The language God has used in this chapter is such that it appears to almost certainly prove that physical circumcision is a requirement for salvation. This can be seen readily when two verses are examined. Verse 10 declares:

    Verse 14 says:

    The covenant spoken of is the marvelous covenant of grace as it is called by many theologians. And the covenant of grace is the Gospel.
    In verses 7 and 8, we can see this very clearly.

    When the Bible speaks about everlasting covenant, and the giving of land as an everlasting possession, it can be speaking only of the Gospel and the salvation the Gospel brings.
    Verses 10 and 14 identify the covenant with physical circumcision. In fact, verse 13 adds even more credence to the apparent necessity of physical circumcision as an integral part of the covenant.

    Indeed, on the basis of these verses, to a high degree the nation of Israel became convinced that because they were physically circumcised, their eternal relationship with God became secure. The verses in this chapter thus became a very severe test for Israel.
    As we shall see, these verses are a severe test for believers of our day also. When this chapter is tied to Romans 4:11, which appears to teach that physical circumcision is a seal, great assurance is given that the statements in the Confessions that the ceremonial laws of water baptism and the Lord's Supper are a seal as well as a sign are altogether true.
    However, as we have already learned, physical circumcision or water baptism or the Passover or the Lord's Supper cannot be seals. This is so because there can be no spiritual substance in any work that we do to try to become saved. God must do all the work.
    What are we to do with these verses in Genesis 17? They appear to teach so clearly that physical circumcision is a requirement for those who wish to be included in the covenant.
    As we try to understand Genesis 17, the first principle we must keep in mind is that this is the Word of God. Therefore, despite the difficulty we may experience in trying to understand it, it is what God wants us to hear.
    Secondly, we must remember that God wrote the Bible so that those who want to have their own kind of salvation program can find verses in the Bible that please them. Thus, the Bible becomes a testing arena for them.

    The third principle we must keep in mind is that whatever we learn from this chapter, it cannot include the idea that any work that we do will assist in our salvation. Thus, we instantly know that the conclusion that physical circumcision is a requirement for or initiates salvation is completely unbiblical.
    How then are we to understand these verses? Let us very carefully look at them. God declares to us in Genesis 17:9-11:

    The all-important information provided by these verses in that physical circumcision is "a token of the covenant betwixt me and you." Immediately, we are set at ease. God has defined physical circumcision as a token or a sign of the Gospel. It is a sign that points to God's salvation plan just as burnt offerings, feast days, and Sabbaths are signs or shadows that point to some aspect of God's salvation plan.

A Very Important Preposition

    With this knowledge, we can now begin to understand verse 13:

    The crucial phrase in this verse is "for an everlasting covenant." How must we understand the preposition "for"? In this context, it can be only understood to mean "pointing to." This is entirely permitted because in the Hebrew language which is the original language of the Old Testament, the preposition translated "for" in this verse has as a primary meaning of direction or turning towards. Thus, the phrase "pointing to" is entirely proper.
    Genesis 17:13 is teaching that physical circumcision is a sign that is performed which points to the everlasting covenant by which God gives salvation. It is reiterating the truth of verse 11 that physical circumcision is a token or a sign.
    Thus, the verse is translated more accurately if the final phrase declares "and my covenant shall be in your flesh pointing to an everlasting covenant." We could paraphrase the verse to say, "He that is born in thy house, and he that is bought with thy money, must needs be physically circumcised and this circumcision of their flesh is a covenant sign pointing to the everlasting covenant which comes with salvation."
    Genesis 17:14 is still a problem. It says:

    This verse appears to clearly teach that a man or child who is not physically circumcised has broken the covenant. To break the covenant means to be under the wrath of God. That is, it means such a person is not saved. Thus, the implication is set forth that the one who has been circumcised is saved.

Ishmael Circumcised

    God helps us to solve this problem by giving us considerable evidence concerning Ishmael who, as the son of Abraham, was

circumcised the same day that Abraham was circumcised. Three times in this chapter it is stated that Ishmael, the son of Abraham, was physically circumcised. We read in verse 23:

    Verse 25 says:

    Verse 26 concludes:

    Obviously, God wants us to understand very clearly that Ishmael was physically circumcised. God also shows very clearly that Ishmael was not elect of God. He would never become saved. This fact demonstrates that physical circumcision absolutely does not initiate or guarantee salvation. In Genesis 17:18-21, God declares to us:

    Moreover, Genesis 21:9-10 declares:

    The above verses definitely state that he was not an heir with Isaac. Thus, he could not have become saved. The Bible clearly teaches that all believers are joint heirs with Christ who is the seed of Isaac.
    Returning to Genesis 17:14, we know, therefore, that this verse is not indicating in any way that physical circumcision initiates or guarantees salvation. In fact, a very important truth is taught by this verse. Physical circumcision was a sign or shadow that pointed to spiritual circumcision. A person who was not physically circumcised is a picture of someone who was not saved; his sins had not been cut off. It is a portrait of someone who is still under the wrath of God. Such a one is a covenant breaker and a covenant breaker is anyone who is not saved; he is still under the wrath of God.
    God commands in Deuteronomy 10:16:

    The command is that mankind is to cut away his sins. But he cannot do this because he is dead in his sins. Therefore, God promises in Deuteronomy 30:6:

    Returning to Genesis 17, we see that God is not and cannot be teaching that physical circumcision has any spiritual grace within this act. It can only be a sign or a shadow. And yet God wrote this chapter in such a way that apparently God is teaching that physical circumcision has some spiritual merit or substance. This is why Genesis 17 is such a severe test for those who call themselves believers. Ancient Israel and many believers today like very much the teaching that physical circumcision has some spiritual substance. That is why they like the conclusion of the Confessions that the ceremonial laws which the Confessions call Sacraments are a sign and a seal. According to this doctrine, I can take an action (physical circumcision of the Old Testament and the so-called Sacraments of the New Testament), that I wrongly believe has spiritual substance within it, and that it somehow gives me a running start, as it were, toward salvation.
    It is no wonder that God rails against this idea. We read in Romans 2:25-29:

    In Galatians 5:3-6, God declares:

    The result of ancient national Israel's faulty trust in keeping the signs for the purpose of achieving a right relationship with God is spoken of in Romans 9:31-32:

    Indeed, let us see the bankruptcy of the idea that theses New Testament ceremonial laws are any kind of seal. Such faulty thinking puts us in great danger of following a works-grace gospel. If we have difficulty in putting away this wrong teaching, we should ask ourselves very honestly why we are so reluctant to do so. It is possible that we and ancient Israel have fallen into the same snare? How terrible that would be!

How Important Is Water Baptism?

    Before we leave the subject of circumcision and water baptism, one other question should be addressed. If water baptism is a sign or a shadow and has no spiritual substance within it, how important is it? Is it not sufficient that God has done all the work of saving us? Why even both with water baptism?

    The fact is that we could ask similar questions concerning many things that we do after we are saved. Why witness to others? Why pray? Why read the Bible? After all, once we are truly saved and have received eternal life, why engage in any or all of these activities? By doing so, we are not becoming more saved.

    The reason that we enthusiastically and joyfully engage in all of these major activities is because God has commanded us to do so. A major evidence of salvation is an ongoing and earnest desire to obey any and all commands that God gives us. God commands the act of water baptism.
    In the Old Testament, the sign that was to be placed on the family in which the father was saved was physical circumcision. Remember that we read in Exodus 12:48:

    By God's command, the sign of circumcision was to be placed on all of the males to indicate that this had become a Gospel family. Placing the sign of circumcision on the males was not optional. It had to be done. We read in Genesis 17:10-14:

    As we saw earlier, the Old Testament sign of circumcision was replaced in the New Testament era with water baptism. Therefore, we are not surprised to read in Acts 10:47-48 in connection with the Roman Cornelius and those who were saved with him:

    Peter was speaking under the inspiration of God the Holy Spirit. Therefore, the command throughout the church age to baptize was from God Himself.

What Is Valid Water Baptism?

    We should now consider a few additional questions. The first is: What constitutes a valid Biblical water baptism? Is water baptism, because it is a shadow and has no substance in itself, so incidental that anyone can perform it? For example, suppose during the church age parents belong to a church that does not understand infant baptism and consequently will not perform it. But these parents want their child baptized. Can the parents baptize this child? The answer has to be, "No." Why is this?
    If we examine every instance of water baptism reported in the Bible, we will find that it was always performed by someone who had been appointed a spiritual overseer of the church. In the Jordan River, John the Baptist and the apostles baptized some people. Philip, who was most likely one of the seven who assisted the early church and possibly was one of the apostles, baptized with water the Ethiopian eunuch (Acts 8:38) and the Samaritan (Acts 8:12). The Apostle Paul baptized the families of Stephanus (I Corinthians 1:16), Lydia and her household (Acts 16:15), the jailer of Philippi and all his (Acts 16:33), and the approximately twelve Ephesians (Acts 19:5). Peter baptized the family of Cornelius (Acts 10:48). In each instance, the record is very clear that water baptism is the responsibility of the spiritual rulers in the church. They have the task of ascertaining as well as they are able if one of the parents is truly saved.

    Thus, if a parent does not belong to a church that baptizes infants, the parent must patiently wait until the child is grown and upon his profession of salvation, then he can be baptized. Or the family might joint a church that practices infant baptism, and at the time they join this church, their children can be baptized.

Should Re-Baptism Ever Be Done?

    Another question that is frequently raised is whether a person baptized as an infant must be baptized again when he makes profession of faith. The answer is found when we look at the sign of circumcision. A person who was circumcised as a baby did not receive another sign when he grew to adulthood, at the time he actually became saved. Likewise, the person baptized as an infant should not be baptized again when he makes profession of faith.

    When we look at the experience of the Samaritans in Acts 8, we find that when Philip thought they had become saved, he administered water baptism. Later, when Peter and John came to investigate the wonderful truth that salvation had come to the Samaritans, we read in Acts 8:14-16:

    Since they had not yet received the Holy Spirit even though they appeared to be saved and even though they had received water baptism, it is very clear that they had not yet become saved. We know this is so because Romans 8:9 declares that:

    When Peter and John ministered to them, they did become saved. Significantly, however, when they did become saved, they did not again receive water baptism. This accords with the experience of many Christians. They were baptized as infants or they were baptized at a time when they thought they had become saved, but later in their life, there was great evidence that they had not been saved at that time. Much later, they did come into a saved relationship with Christ. Following the example of the Samaritans, we know that they should not receive water baptism a second time.

Baptizing in the Name of Jesus

    Another question frequently asked is: Why does Matthew 28 use the language, "baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost"? But in the Book of Acts, the

language is always similar to Acts 8:16, where God speaks of the Samaritans who had received water baptism having been "baptized" in the name of the Lord Jesus.
    The answer to this question is found when we carefully look at the baptism of the twelve Ephesians as it is recorded in Acts 19:2-6:

    This instructive passage indicates that someone (perhaps Apollos), had ministered to these Ephesians. It appeared that they had become saved so they were baptized with water. But when the Apostle Paul checked on them, he found two truths: (1) they had not yet become saved (the Holy Spirit had not come upon them); and (2) they had been baptized with John's baptism.
    As we learned from the experience of the Samaritans as recorded in Acts 8, if they had been properly baptized in water before they were saved, another baptism in water would not be required after they were saved. But their water baptism was not valid. They were baptized with John's baptism. Remember we learned earlier that the baptisms performed by John the Baptist were Old Testament washings pointing tot the coming Savior. Therefore, even as none of the Old Testament signs which pointed to the atonement are to be observed since Christ went to the cross, so, too, John's baptism is not to be observed.
    Therefore, these Ephesians were baptized more correctly in the name of Christ. The truth that shines through is that the Book of

Acts insists that baptism in the name of Christ is post-Pentecost baptism. To be baptized in the name of Christ signifies that the washing of salvation is on the authority of Christ's completed work on the cross. It is not in opposition to the language of Matthew 28 where baptizing is to be in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. Rather, it provides further teaching concerning the nature of the washing away of our sins. Our sins are washed away on the authority of Christ having paid for them. We, therefore, are baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. When our sins are washed away, we are washed (baptized) into the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. That is, we enter in the most intimate fashion into a relationship with the triune God.

    Consequently, if someone is looking for a language to use in water baptism, it would be altogether valid to speak of baptizing in the name of the Lord Jesus into the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.
    Returning to the Acts 19 account of Ephesians, we read that they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus before they were saved. Thus, their experience was much like that of the Samaritans of Acts 8. Some might, therefore, use this fact to attempt to prove that water baptism is a requirement for salvation.
    This idea is immediately nullified when we recall that the family of Cornelius received water baptism after they were saved. Acts 10:47-48:

    Moreover, as we learned earlier, water baptism is a work that we do and therefore can never be a condition for salvation.

Summary

    We will now summarize some of the principles we have learned about baptism.

    1. The Greek words baptizo and baptismos which are normally translated "baptism" always mean washing or cleansing from sin.

    2. There is one baptism even though the Bible speaks of baptism in the Spirit and water baptism. Water baptism is a shadow of baptism in the Spirit and has no substance in itself. It was a New Testament ceremonial law to be observed throughout the church age.

    3. Therefore, water baptism is never a condition for salvation nor can it initiate or guarantee salvation.

    4. Whenever the Bible employs the word "baptism," we must conclude that baptism or washing away of sins is in view. Only if the context clearly indicates water baptism is in view is water baptism to be understood.

    5. The only word used in the Bible to suggest the mode of baptism is the word "sprinkle."

    6. During the church age, when one parent in a family became saved, then the sign or shadow of salvation (water baptism) was to be placed on all the members of the family.

    7. During the church age, only a qualified spiritual overseer of the congregation was to administer water baptism.

    8. Water baptism is a sign or shadow but should never be regarded as a seal.