Galatians 1:6-9

Introduction:

1. This evening we will address three questions all pertaining to conversion, each with some concern for the place baptism in the plan of salvation.

2. Most of the religious world vehemently disagrees with the position we advocate in the matter, and each of these questions has some bearing on it.

Discussion:

I. Is John’s Gospel in Mark 1 the Same as Acts 2?

A. Another question flowing from this question is if the immersion he taught bolsters immersion for the forgiveness of sins as taught elsewhere.

B. The word “beginning” in Mark 1:1 indicates the commencement of the gospel of Christ.

C. My answer to the main question is yes and no.

1. In the macro sense, John’s gospel of Christ is the same as that of the apostles later; the core is the redeeming work of Christ.

2. In the micro sense, it is different as the full details of that work were yet to be revealed to the apostles (John 16:12-15; Acts 19:1-7).

D. My answer to the secondary question is yes and no.

1. It is yes in that the terms did not change from John to Peter to Paul; Gr. baptidzo means to immerse, so modality is clear (cf. Acts 19:1-5).

2. It is no because John’s baptism was distinct from the apostles’ and did not necessitate it in the fullness; it was commanded on its own.

3. The last part bears on the next question.

II. How Do We Explain the Sprinkling in NT?

A. Obviously, this question is directly linked to the one above as immersion is not sprinkling.

B. The earliest defense of sprinkling is from Cyprian, bishop of Carthage from ca. 248-258 A.D.

C. The practice flowed from infant baptism; immersing babies in water can be dangerous.

D. Some passages used in defense include 1 Peter 1:2; Hebrews 9:13-14; 10:22.

E. My answer is two-fold:

1. The meaning of the terms translated baptize and baptism is to dip, plunge, immerse (Thayer, Strong, BDAG, Mounce, et. al).

2. In context, the NT statements allude to OT rituals from the sacrificial system (Hebrews 9:19-23; 10:19-22; 1 Peter 1:1; Leviticus 14:7; 16:14-15).

F. Sprinkling in the NT is a metaphorical look back at OT purification, not an alternative mode for the baptism commanded in the NT.

III. How Do We Answer the “Agree to Disagree” Defense of Contradictory Teachings?

A. This is a common retort akin to “That’s just your interpretation” when confronting errors.

B. Several NT passages militate against this idea:

1. Matthew 7:15-23 upends the idea.

2. Matthew 15:7-8 highlights the vanity of the commandments of men.

3. Multiple passages call for withdrawing from the false teacher (Romans 16:17-18; 2 Thessalonians 3:14-15; Titus 1:9-11; 3:10; 1 John 4:1; 2 John 9-11).

C. In my humble opinion, Galatians 1:6-10 most completely answers the agree to disagree concept.

1. Contradictory gospels leave one accursed: Gr. anathema; doomed to destruction (Thayer).

2. If two people teach two different gospels, one or both is contradicting the apostles, and therefore one or both is anathema.

Conclusion:

1. If we allow the NT to fully guide our decisions, we will see that faith in Jesus, repentance of sin, and confession lead us to immersion in water for forgiveness.

2. Jesus did not agree to disagree, and neither can we; we must stand where He stands.