PERVERTING THE GOSPEL

Seventh-day Adventist Missionary Society · Oakland, California · May 5, 1881

PERVERTING THE GOSPEL.

In a late number of a religious paper we find an extended argument to prove that "water baptism is not essential to salvation." We notice this not for the sake of this one article alone, but because we often hear the same ideas advanced, and because there is a principle involved which should receive the careful attention of all lovers of the truth of God. The argument is based entirely upon the fact that there are many important texts defining obligation wherein no mention is made of baptism! It is surprising that any sane man of ordinary intelligence should consider this good ground for an argument to that intent; but it is even so. And this is not the only subject which is thus abused. We often hear people contend that the Sabbath is not binding because it is not mentioned in certain Scriptures, though it is very plainly enjoined in others; or because it was not "re-enacted," although it never was abolished. Such people have no conception of governing principles, or of the harmony of God's word. But to the argument. We first quote the following:—

"If water baptism was essential to salvation Peter must have made a mistake in the third chapter of Acts, 19th verse, where he says: 'Repent ye therefore and be converted that your sins may be blotted out when the times of refreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord.' Here baptism is left out which shows that Peter, in Acts 2:38, did not mean that water baptism puts away sin. 'Refreshing from the presence of the Lord' certainly means the influence of the Spirit on a converted soul."

The reader will say this is a mere cavil. We think it is nothing less than that. After quoting a number of texts to the same purpose, the writer closes with the following case, which most clearly shows the character of the entire argument:—

"Also see or read the celebrated sermon of Jesus, found in the 5th 6th and 7th chapters of Matthew: in his wonderful discourse there is not a word said about baptism, and yet the whole duty of man is stated and practically defined. He does not say blessed are the baptized the first time. Love to God is not found in outward baptism."

It may be that some have held baptism in a distorted light, teaching that it is the only means for the remission of sin, and that it is specially against this error that the argument is aimed. But that is no excuse for putting forth an argument which so completely subverts a gospel duty. No one should use an error to correct an error.

Let us try this method of argument. Repentance is not necessary to salvation, because in the sermon on the mount, where "the whole duty of man is stated and practically defined," the Saviour said nothing whatever of repentance. And in Paul's excellent letter to the Ephesians, to whom he said he kept back nothing that was profitable to them, he made no mention of repentance. Nor yet to the Philippians, to the Colossians, to the Thessalonians, to Titus, nor to Philemon. Nor did John or Jude speak of it. Surely repentance cannot be essential to salvation when it is so utterly ignored by so many important Scriptures!

And faith is not necessary to salvation, or else Peter made a mistake in Acts 3:19, where he showed what is necessary to have our sins blotted out, but said nothing of faith.

And so we might specify. But the writer to whom reference is here made, would reply that both faith and repentance are enjoined in the word of God in some places if not in those specified. True; and it is true that the Saviour said, "He that believeth and is baptized, shall be saved." He did not consider it of small moment, even though a person might be saved without it. It is true that Peter commanded them to repent and be baptized for the remission of sin. The least that can be said of this is that baptism is made a part of that system wherein is remission of sin and salvation. It is true that Cornelius was told to send for Peter of whom he would learn what he ought to do; and Peter "commanded them to be baptized." Not by the baptism of the Spirit, for that they had already received. And we do not think that "Peter made a mistake" in this—he understood his Lord's commission. And so of other texts.

But what if you can be saved without baptism? Are you certain that you will be if you continue to slight duties made plain to your understanding in the gospel? Do you think so little of the will of your Master that you will disobey him as far as you possibly can, yet so as to be saved? Oh, such selfishness, to be called Christianity! Such perversions of the right way of God! We desire that men so blinded may be led to repent of such wickedness, and pray God if perhaps the thought of their heart may be forgiven them. It is no small error to lead men to slight the word of the Lord, and teach them to neglect his requirements.