The Doctrine of Baptism

The first of two lectures on baptism given at the Free Church College, Edinburgh, on 8/4/2014.

1 

The Doctrine of Baptism 

We do not to be a genius to note that the Christian church, which is divided about many beliefs and practices, is divided about the meaning and mode of baptism. While there are some groups connected to Christianity that don’t practice baptism at all, such as the Quakers and the Salvation Army, the vast majority of Christian denominations adhere to a doctrinal and practical opinion about baptism. Within those who do so, there is quite a diversity of opinion. Yet they can be divided into (1) those who believe in baptismal regeneration, (2) those who believe that baptism is only for believers who have made a conscious decision to follow Jesus, and (3) those who have an understanding of baptism as being connected to a covenant relationship with God, with that covenant relationship including their infants and children as well. 

Baptismal regeneration 

More than one type of Christian denomination believes in baptismal regeneration. The Roman Catholic Church, the Orthodox Churches and some Protestant denominations, such as the Church of England, all affirm in their written statements of faith that infants are regenerated at baptism, with some suggesting that it removes original sin. At the other end of the Christian spectrum, the Churches of Christ insist that baptism of those professing to believe in Christ is the time when they become children of God. 

Why do these denominations argue for baptismal regeneration? They would answer that there are passages in the Bible that indicate baptism is a saving experience. For example, take 1 Peter 3:21: ‘Baptism, which corresponds to this, now saves you, not as a removal of dirt from the body but as an appeal to God for a good conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ.’ Or 1 Corinthians 12:13: ‘For in one Spirit we were all baptized into one body – Jews or Greeks, slaves or free – and all were made to drink of one Spirit.’ And Galatians 3:27: ‘For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ.’  Then there is Titus 3:5: ‘he saved us, not because of works done by us in righteousness, but according to his own mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewal of the Holy Spirit.’  

Our response is twofold. First, there are plenty passages that indicate individuals were saved before they were baptised, and there is no evidence that suggests their salvation was incomplete until they were baptised. Second, those who argue for baptismal regeneration fail to appreciate that the word ‘baptism’ can be used to describe what the ritual points to, matters such as the forgiveness of sin or joining the invisible church, without requiring us to believer that baptism brings them about. 

Of course, it is easy for us to dismiss those who advocate baptismal regeneration as being unbiblical. Yet I suspect we are not so confident when facing those who insist that Christian baptism is only administered to individuals who have professed to believe in Jesus and usually administered by immersion. We tend at times to cover up our insecurity by accepting that it is a disagreement among friends and even at times are willing to accept that their teaching is valid. After all, does not the New Testament indicate that baptism followed conversion and was by immersion? I would say a partial ‘yes’ to the first half, that baptism followed the profession of adults, and a ‘no’ to the second half, that baptism was by immersion. How can I say that? To begin with, there is 

The meaning of baptizo

As we know, the words connected to baptism are used literally and metaphorically. Literally they are used of persons and of objects and metaphorically they are used to describe Christ’s mission (baptise with fire), Christ’s death and in connection with various Christian doctrines. When used of persons they often describe an initiation rite and with regard to objects they are usually connected to aspects of the Levitical law in which these objects were washed in a liquid. When the term is used metaphorically, usually God is the one engaged in baptizing. 

It is obvious that the words connected to baptism are transliterations and not translations of Greek words. Often it is stated with great confidence that the terms describe dipping. We cannot deny that dipping clearly occurs in some situations where the terms are used, but that is not definite evidence that the terms in themselves mean dipping. All that is needed to disprove the claim is biblical passages that use the terms but where dipping cannot be a possible explanation. And such passages exist. 

The clearest passage in this regard is 1 Corinthians 10:11-2: ‘For I do not want you to be unaware, brothers, that our fathers were all under the cloud, and all passed through the sea, and all were baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea.’ In that reference, the baptism has nothing to do with water and it is impossible that we imagine the Israelites somehow were dipped into Moses. So what does it mean? 

Kistemaker interprets it to mean this: ‘For the Israelites, being “baptized into Moses” signified that they were members of the covenant which God had made with his people (Exod. 24:4b–8). Moses served as mediator of that first covenant, which became obsolete, but Christ is the Mediator of the new covenant (Heb. 7:22; 8:6; 9:15). Just as God’s people became a nation with Moses as its leader, so God’s people today are incorporated into Christ, who is their spiritual head (Eph. 5:23).’ 

David Prior takes it to mean this: ‘Before the people of Israel received this physical and spiritual sustenance (supernatural food and supernatural drink), all were baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea. The use of the word baptized is, of course, highly significant. To be baptized into Moses meant that they were voluntarily and unconditionally placing themselves under the leadership of Moses. Paul’s very striking, but unusual, language in this passage emphasizes the parallels between the privileges of God’s people under Moses and the privileges of God’s people under Jesus. In both historical epochs there were two events which were pregnant with meaning: being baptized to denote loyalty to God’s appointed leader; and being provided with “supernatural” food and drink on a regular basis.’ 

There seems no doubt that Paul is making a parallel between the experiences of Israel (baptism into Moses and eating the manna) and the church (baptism and the Lord's Supper). What is also evident is that dipping cannot be the meaning of being baptised into Moses. Instead the meaning of ‘baptised’ is identification and union. 

When we realise this, we can see how the words can be used in situations when water is in focus and when it is not. So a person can be baptised with fire, baptised into the body of Christ, baptised into the death and resurrection of Christ, and none of them have to be connected to the ritual of water baptism.  

One of the common passages used by Baptist friends in support of their practice is Romans 6:3-4: ‘Do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? We were buried therefore with him by baptism into death, in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, we too might walk in newness of life.’ It is frequently said that immersion illustrates what Paul is saying there: when a person goes under the water he depicts his death and when he comes out of the water he depicts his new life.  

In response to their view, we can note the following details: (1) Paul does not mention water here, so it has to be brought in to the meaning. (2) Paul is describing something that happened to every Christian, which is that they died when Jesus died, were buried with him, and rose when he rose. In other words, he is referring to spiritual union and identity and not to a ritual that may or may not take place in a certain way.

The context decides if water baptism is in view and if it is not clearly stated then we should be careful about introducing it into the meaning. 

Where did the practice of Christian baptism in water come from? 

The New Testament records two types of baptism that were practised before the death and resurrection of Jesus. One was the baptism connected to John the Baptist and the other was the baptism practised by the disciples of Jesus. We also know from other sources that various groups in Judaism adopted baptism as a means of expressing their adherence to certain beliefs and purification ideas. Moreover, proselytes to the Jewish faith were baptized. While some scholars suggest otherwise, it is very unlikely that Jesus was connected in any way to those other groups and he would not have borrowed a practice from them. 

Was the baptism of John linked to Christian baptism? There certainly was overlap between some of the disciples of Jesus because they had been part of the religious movement connected to John. And since Jesus insisted that he undergo John’s baptism, does that mean it was a kind of Christian baptism? The answer of the Book of Acts is that John’s baptism in itself was insufficient and cannot be classified as Christian baptism. Luke makes that very clear as he describes the incident involving twelve disciples of John who lived in Ephesus and whom Paul insisted had to undergo Christian baptism (Acts 19:1-6). 

What about the baptisms performed by the disciples of Jesus (John 4:1-2)? Obviously Jesus approved of them and we can assume that those who were baptised were committing themselves in some degree to follow him. The apostle John indicates that the numbers baptised by Jesus’ disciples was significant. So it is surprising that nothing is heard of such individuals later on and it looks as if their commitment was temporary. It is also unlikely that those individuals were baptised into the name of the Trinity, given that the period referred to by John was in the very early days of Christ’s ministry and before he taught his disciples about the Trinity. 

So we can conclude that their involvement in those baptisms would have helped prepare the apostles to administer Christian baptisms, but they would not have given adequate instruction to those baptised that could be described as Christian.   

Baptism is a sign of discipleship – says Jesus 

As far as I can see, we have to begin with the basic statement of institution of the ordinance of baptism and it is found in what is called the Great Commission: ‘And Jesus came and said to them, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age.”’  

If one suggests that ‘Great Commission’ is a wrong title for the occasion described, his suggestion is usually dismissed. Yet I would like to say that I think it is a wrong title because as far as I can see it contains specific instructions to the apostles who literally did travel into all the world (unlike most other Christian leaders then and since) about how they were to set in motion a kingdom in which the reign of Jesus is acknowledged. They were to do so by discovering or arranging for disciples in every country of the world. Yet although those disciples would come from diverse backgrounds they would be identified by two shared features: baptism in the name of the Trinity and subsequent or parallel adherence to the teaching of Jesus. 

Although the text does not say so, it is reasonable and very safe to assume that Jesus here means baptism in water. He does tell us what it signifies when he says that they should be baptised in the name of the Trinity. So what does this indicate? 

We should note that there is progression here because it is not identification merely with the Lord as identified as the God of Israel or with the Lord as revealed as the God of Abraham. It is identity with the same God, but its linkage with him as revealed in a profounder and more dynamic way.  

First, we can see in this formula that baptism is a sign of submission to the triune God. We can understand how baptism has this aspect because before becoming disciples those baptised were opposed to God. Baptism in the name of the Trinity is a sign that they profess to serve him. 

Second, we can see in this formula that baptism is a sign of communion or interaction with the triune God. Christian baptism indicates that discipleship involves interaction with each person of the Trinity as they function together for the spiritual benefits of the baptised. Of course, this is a lifelong, indeed an eternity-long experience. Baptism is a sign that an eternal process has begun.  

Third, we can ask in what way does this relationship with the triune God work. The answer to this question is that it works itself out in the form of a covenant. To submit to a master and to follow his instructions was core to a covenant relationship, and were the appropriate, indeed mandatory response to the benefits that the master had provided for his subjects and intended to provide for them. I want to examine those aspects in a bit more detail. 

Invitation to communion with God 

We can see the invitation from the command to baptise in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. The feature of closeness is seen in the preposition ‘in’ (eis) which has the meaning of into something, here into the name. What is being illustrated is the possibility of union with each of the divine persons. 

Of course, union with each divine person has a wide range of topics. Connection with the Father can remind us of election and adoption, of a purpose and a family. Connection with the Son can remind us of redemption and inheritance, of master and servants. Connection with the Spirit can remind us of sanctification, of comfort, of the fruit of the Spirit. Many more details could be mentioned in connection to each divine Person. Baptism is a divine invitation to this range of experiences. 

Moreover we should notice that although there are three persons in the Trinity, there is only one name. This means that while we can distinguish them from one another we should not separate them from working together. It is possible to have contact with each of the divine persons simultaneously; in fact we should have it with each of them simultaneously. Baptism is an invitation to be always in the presence of the triune God. 

The point I wish to emphasise is that the sign of baptism is Jesus’ way of inviting sinners from all over the world to come to know God. The mere performance of the ritual does not bring about this experience, but each time we witness a baptism we are being reminded that Jesus desires that all who are baptised should come to know each person of the adorable Trinity. 

Expression of confidence in Jesus 

The second detail about baptism here is that it is an expression of confidence in the plan and power of Jesus. Here Jesus informs his apostles that his people are going to come from all over the world, from every nation. There is a sense in which this ingathering would be sequential as far as the nations are concerned as the gospel went to one people group and then to another. Yet the ingathering is more that sequential because eventually people would begin to be converted simultaneously in different places.  

That is what is happening in the world today. I wonder how many people will be baptised this week in the name of the Trinity. Baptisms are not expressions of isolation, the sign that only a few believe in the name of God. Instead each baptism is a sign that God is on the march, as it were, for victory in the lives of sinners. 

Confidence that accompanies baptism will have a strong interest in evangelism. The sign tells us that the gospel has power to bring in the biggest of sinners. After all, we can look at the original group of apostles and see how each of them had been rescued from the power of sin. Or we can remind ourselves that in a few years time a great opponent of the church was to arise, Saul of Tarsus. I wonder did anyone, when they observed baptisms taking place in Jerusalem and elsewhere, pray that the day would come when Saul of Tarsus would be converted.  This sign of baptism is a reminder of the power of Jesus in evangelism. 

Confidence that accompanies baptism will have a strong interest in edification. This is what Jesus stressed here when he instructed the apostles to teach future disciples about what he had taught to them. Yet when we think of the apostles at this time, we know that they had a lot to learn. Despite being in the physical presence of Jesus and hearing his wonderful voice they had not been able to absorb his teachings. What was the remedy for them? The Saviour had already told them that the Holy Spirit would soon come and lead them into all truth. And how quickly he taught them – we only have to look at the understanding they had a few days later on the Day of Pentecost. The same Spirit instructed the bigoted Saul of Tarsus and how rapidly he learned. And the Holy Spirit is here to instruct the baptised about the things of the kingdom. Do you know someone whom the Holy Spirit cannot teach? Do you think there is an intellectual giant who cannot be taught the simple truths of the faith? Do you imagine that there is an unintelligent person whom the Holy Spirit cannot instruct in the deep truths of the faith? When we find ourselves in situations of difficulty, think of how Christian baptism has led to thousands, indeed millions, experiencing the transforming edification of the Spirit. 

Exhortation to submission 

Jesus speaks here about three kinds of authority he possesses. First, he mentions universal authority, that he governs heaven and earth from his death to his return in the future. This authority is constant and comprehensive. He is not off the throne for even a second and there is not an inch of space that is ever outwith his control. This is part of our confession that we make at times of baptism. We do this because we believe that he has universal power. 

Second, Jesus speaks about ecclesiastical authority. Here he requires his apostles to baptise his disciples wherever they will be found. It was not the apostles who invented the rite of baptism. Instead it was Jesus, the head of the church, who made this stipulation. The reason that a church has a baptismal service is because it accepts and delights in the fact that Jesus is head of his church. This activity is traced all the way back to the command given by Jesus on that mountain in Galilee. 

Third, Jesus speaks about personal authority over those who profess to believe in him. It is important to observe that Jesus did not ask the apostles to focus on whether or not the disciples were genuine ones. The proof that they are genuine will be seen in their response to the teachings of Jesus. Genuine disciples will accept his teachings as the rules for their lives. With regard to his teachings, they were not allowed to be selective, deciding whether or not they could disobey some or ignore some of what he had commanded. 

An obvious response to this amazing prospect would be, ‘How can we possibly discover what this involves?’ Jesus has anticipated this response when he informs the apostles how discipleship would be guided and governed. In order for what is indicated in baptism to be realised, the teachings of Jesus have to be understood and lived out. We cannot find out about the Trinity, how they interact with one another or how they will interact with their followers, without paying close attention to what the apostles have told us about Jesus. 

What did Peter say about baptism at Pentecost? 

How did the apostles interpret this instruction of Jesus when the first opportunity came along to do so? The first opportunity took place on the Day of Pentecost after Peter had preached to the large number gathered there. Many were impressed and asked what they should do in response. Peter said to them, ‘Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. For the promise is for you and for your children and for all who are far off, everyone whom the Lord our God calls to himself’ (Acts 2:38-39). His exhortation provides several important details about baptism. 

First, until a person is baptised, he could not be publicly regarded as forgiven. Peter did not say to them that it was sufficient if they believed secretly. Instead he informed them that the proof of their new outlook would be a willingness to identify with other believers. This is an aspect that previous generations in our denomination were unlikely to come across or even engage in, and which will increase in frequency if our society continues its move away from a Christian framework and we get converts from outside the Christian church. Obviously this detail only concerns a profession made by an individual able to make an intelligent response. Clearly the willingness to be baptised was an indication of genuine conversion, that the convert wanted to join the society of the forgiven. So what would you say to an unbaptized person who was seeking to follow Jesus? You will have to speak to him about inner reality and outward conformity to Jesus’ requirements. 

Second, baptism should be administered at the time of profession. This is the common feature of the accounts in Acts, whether describing a large number or an individual. We can see the relevance of this in connection to the previous point about when we assure a person they are now disciples of Jesus. There would be a problem if forgiveness could not be assured until a baptismal event a few days later, which of course is what happened with the apostle Paul (whether or not he was converted actually on the Damascus road, it could have been after he reached Damascus – Ananias did not announce forgiveness until Paul was baptised). 

This detail of when raises the question as to where baptisms should take place. For us, a baptism is part of a service of public worship. Yet there is not an example of such in the New Testament, as far as I know. Those baptised on the Day of Pentecost were not in such a service, neither was Paul when he was baptised, nor was the Ethiopian eunuch or the Philippian jailor. I am not suggesting that baptisms should not happen during a worship service. After all, we have instructions about it in our directory of public worship. Yet I would say that the New Testament would urge us to be flexible because there may be situations in which it may not be possible for a worship service to happen, such as times of persecution. The obvious consequence of having baptism during a worship service is a delay in administering it. 

Third, the immediacy of baptism explains how the reception of the Holy Spirit could be connected to the ritual. If a person refused to be baptised, he or she could not be regarded as having believed in Jesus. The affirmation by Peter indicates that the main evidence of the presence of the Spirit is obedience, and one clear way of doing so was confessing that Jesus is Lord (as again we see from the baptism of Paul). 

Fourth, Peter’s words highlight that baptism signifies the promise of the Spirit. Paul writing in Galatians says that the fulfilment of the Abrahamic covenant is the coming of the Spirit into the experience of God’s people. In his sermon, Peter assures his listeners that they and their children could have the promise of the Spirit. The mentioning of children is a statement from an apostle that children of baptised adults are included within the range of promised blessings and therefore should be baptised because of the connection to their parents. It would have been wrong to deny the covenant sign of circumcision to Israelite children and it is wrong to deny the covenant sign of the new era to Christian children. 

Were you baptized in the name of Paul? (1 Corinthians 1:13) 

It is obvious from a reading of 1 Corinthians that there were severe problems in the church in Corinth. One of the faults that marked them was the practice of some, if not all, of identifying themselves with prominent Christian leaders – Paul here mentions four claims that were common in Corinth. No doubt, there were various reasons for the people doing so. One reason appears to be connected to who baptised them, as we can see from Paul’s question. 

Providentially, he had not baptized many of them, so they could not claim a link to Paul in this way. Perhaps most of those who were converted during his original stay in Corinth had been baptized by his colleagues, Silas and Timothy – they had been his co-workers during that mission. His ambivalence here should not be read as suggesting baptism is unimportant – what is unimportant is the name of the person who performs the baptism. 

Paul’s reference to baptism raised important questions for the Corinthians and it raises such matters for us as well.  There are at least five details that we can consider briefly. 

First, baptism is the response that is required of everyone to the gospel, whatever their ethnic background, social status, previous lifestyle or gender. How did saved sinners in Corinth show that they have become disciples of Jesus? Many of them would never have been in contact with one another before; after all, some of them were Jews and others were Gentiles; some of them were slaves and others were free; some of them were educated and others were not; some were male and others were female. There had to be a method that would show clearly that they all now belonged to Jesus. That method was baptism. When a person was baptised, he or she was indicating that the past distinctions no longer had power over them. Indeed, baptism was a renunciation of their previous way of life.  

Second, baptism was the way of entrance into the visible church in Corinth, but it is only the start of a life of discipleship. What happened once they were baptised? Their participation in this rite was not the final aspect of their response to Jesus. Instead it was like a door that both shuts out the past and opens up the future. Their future was now one of belonging to the community of sinners who wanted to live according to the teachings of the Word of God. In the case of the Corinthians, it meant that they would practice the teachings of the apostles because they had the authority of Jesus regarding what they taught.  

Entrance into the visible church in Corinth also meant that the others in the church were committed to help the spiritual state of one another. This commitment began at the moment the new member entered the visible church. It is important to note that membership of the visible church does not guarantee membership of the invisible church. Baptism brings us into the visible church but it is not connected as such to the invisible church. The invisible church is a term that describes aspects of the church that we cannot see – one another’s hearts, the genuineness of our prayer lives, our longings after holiness, the reality of our confession of sin. No human can put one into the invisible church and no human can put a believer out of the invisible church. 

Third, baptism is a family activity, as we can see from Paul’s reference to the household of Stephanos. Paul almost seems to throw in this piece of information as an additional fact. But it is a very important fact because it tells us that Paul and other Christians, as we can see from elsewhere in the New Testament, baptised households or families (the term ‘household’ could include every person who belonged to the father including the families of his slaves). It is inevitable that some of those belonging to the households would have been children.  

Fourth, baptism, in itself, does not guarantee sinless living. This is obvious from the church in Corinth itself. If we have the time to read through 1 and 2 Corinthians we might be surprised at some of the practices they engaged in. It is the case that they did things that are not often found among Christians. Nevertheless, reminding them of baptism would also have been comforting because they would have recalled that it signified cleansing from sin. And that I suspect is probably the main message most of us need to hear as we gather for a baptism. We gather as sinners needing cleansing to welcome into the church composed of sinners another sinner who now belongs to the visible church. 

How does baptism save us (1 Peter 3:21-22)? 

The context of Peter’s comment is the flood connected with Noah. The common feature in the flood and in baptism is salvation: at the flood Noah and his family were saved because they were in the ark that Noah built; baptism saves Peter’s readers because it somehow brings them into contact with Jesus. What does Peter mean by his statement that ‘baptism now saves’? His other writings make it very clear that he does not mean baptismal regeneration.  

First, Peter reminds his readers that baptism is not designed to clean their physical bodies. Perhaps some were regarding the meaning of baptism in this superficial way.  

Then Peter says that baptism is ‘the appeal to God for a good conscience’. Baptism of a new convert is an occasion when a person states that he or she will live a holy life from the inside. Peter’s word ‘appeal’ probably alludes to promises or petitions that a person would have made to God at his or her baptism. So their baptism would have revealed to others that they were asking God for salvation, for cleansing from sin, which is the proper response to his grace and one of which conscience would approve. Thinking about their baptism would enable them to maintain a good conscience. That which was professed by them at their baptisms must remain the desire of their hearts throughout life. 

Peter also indicates that the waters of the flood and the water of baptism both speak of divine judgement on evil societies. We can see that is the case with regard to the flood because it is so obvious – we know that eventually the whole race perished apart from Noah’s family because it had departed from God. It is not easy initially to see baptism as an expression of divine judgement. Yet if think about baptism, we will also see that it is connected to divine judgement. After all, the basic reason why baptism takes place is because Jesus himself bore God’s judgement on behalf of those who trust in him. When an individual gets baptised, he or she is saying that they believe divine judgement is a reality, that they deserve divine judgement, and that Jesus took their place and paid the penalty they should have paid. And they are also saying that the unconverted are in danger of experiencing God’s judgement because normally the saved in a community will have been baptised as a sign that they believe in Jesus.  

Peter also suggests that baptism points to future cleansing. The flood, while being an act of divine judgement, was also the sign that God was cleansing the earth of defilement caused by the sinful practices of the anti-deluvians. Therefore, as far as the human race was concerned, even although it had been reduced to eight people, the flood was also a sign of hope that their sinful world would yet become a holy place suitable for God to dwell among them. It was not a sign in this sense for those who had ignored the preaching of Noah, but it was a sign for those who accepted his message. And does baptism not remind us of this as well? Each time baptism is administered, we should see that God is not only promising personal cleansing to the baptised individual, he is also promising a wider cleansing, that there will yet be a new universe in which all will be pure and on which God will dwell.  

Moreover, says Peter, baptism points to the divine way of escape. As far as the flood was concerned, the means of escape was the ark that Noah built. Peter states that what gives meaning to their ritual of baptism is the resurrection of Jesus. We are familiar with many rituals that are totally meaningless because of a lack of real power connected to them. Indeed Christian baptism was not the only form of baptism that was practised – many Jewish groups had their own reasons for including baptisms in their religious practices. What would make Christian baptism effective and not like these other kinds? The resurrection power of Jesus is the answer. Christian baptism is an outward sign that it is possible to experience union with Jesus Christ through faith.  

What is the significance of baptism for us? 

The first detail is that baptism is the family badge. When Ananias went to see Saul of Tarsus in order to baptise him, the first words that he said were, ‘Brother Saul.’ That greeting would have said many different things to Saul, but at a basic level Ananias was saying to him, ‘Welcome to the family.’  

The second detail is that baptism is a reminder that God has a plan for all who are baptised. The plan involves coming to know God’s will and to become a witness for Jesus Christ.  

The third detail about baptism is that it illustrates personal cleansing from sin. It is possible to read some verses on the surface and think that it is baptism that washes away the sins. Rather it is faith in Jesus that brings about our cleansing. 

The fourth detail is that baptism is a reminder that we are receiving the blessings promised in the covenant God made with Abraham. We can see features of this covenant in the emphasis in the Great Commission on the ingathering of baptised people from all the nations and in the sermon of Peter at Pentecost that baptised people and their children inherited the promise made to Abraham.