Introduction
The doctrine of salvation by “faith alone” (Sola fide in Latin, a historically popular usage) has its roots in the Reformation Movement, with men like Martin Luther emphasizing this concept in reaction to certain teachings in the Catholic Church. The Reformation teachers were correct in asserting that we cannot in any way earn or deserve salvation, and if you understand what was taking place in the Catholic Church of their day, you can understand why they were so focused on faith as contrasted to meritorious works. However, the way the doctrine of “faith alone” was stated originally and interpreted as church history unfolded led to some misunderstandings of how the Bible actually defines faith.
To state the obvious, this doctrine was focused on the human part of salvation rather than on God’s part (the main part ─ grace). Thus, in considering this narrow focus, we could quickly say that we are not saved by faith alone. But this wasn’t the intent of the Reformation writers; they were in fact focusing on man’s response to God’s grace. One of the best passages to show the overall way of salvation is Ephesians 2:8-10.
For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God ─ 9 not by works, so that no one can boast. 10 For we are God’s handiwork, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do.
This is a marvelous passage, as it encapsulates the doctrine of salvation by grace through faith. One reason it is such a significant passage is because it deals with both sides of salvation, the Divine side and the human side. Another reason it is so important is that it deals with both types of works ─ meritorious works (which cannot earn salvation) and works of faith (which are produced by our love and commitment to God). A common way to describe the difference is to say that we are not saved by our works but we work because we are saved. Romans develops this topic in much more detail and helps us really understand this important difference.
In stating that we are saved by grace through faith, Paul is not saying that the Divine and human parts of salvation are equal ─ far from it. The real basis or ground of salvation is the grace of God ultimately expressed in the death of Jesus on the cross. The human part is simply our acceptance of what God has done to make salvation possible. Describing God’s part in our salvation as the ground of forgiveness and our part as conditions of acceptance is a helpful way to look at the subject. Grace is a gift and our acceptance of this gift is the faith of which Paul speaks. Having said that, our faith is essential to our salvation, and understanding exactly what is meant by the term faith is likewise essential. The challenge is that this term is defined biblically in a number of slightly different ways, at least six by my count, and these differences matter, as we will see.
1 Corinthians 13:13 says that the “Big Three” are faith, hope and love – with love being the greatest.
Love isn’t that difficult to define, since several different Greek words are all translated into English as love, and each of the Greek terms can be clearly defined. Hope isn’t difficult to define either, but it does receive far less attention among believers than it deserves. However, faith is the most challenging to define, simply because the Bible uses it in a number of slightly different ways, and understanding the context in which it is found is often the only way to define it accurately. This challenge should come as no surprise to us, since Satan is always trying to deceive us. Since Ephesians 2:8-10 says we are saved by God’s grace through our faith, you can predict that he is going to work very hard to confuse us about such an important issue involving our salvation. So, with that background, let’s delve carefully into God’s definition of faith, as found in the Bible.
Faith: a Word of Many Nuances
First, sometimes the term denotes simply intellectual belief. Romans 10:14 – “How, then, can they call on the one they have not believed in? And how can they believe in the one of whom they have not heard? And how can they hear without someone preaching to them?” As intellectual belief, faith is a part of a process in accepting Christ, not the whole process. Second, sometime faith or belief describes the concept of trust. 2 Corinthians 5:7 – “We live by faith, not by sight.” The context is about trusting that there is life after death and a spiritual body awaiting the saved, suited for eternity. Third, sometimes faith is preceded by the definite article and is being used to refer to the New Testament as God’s covenant with us. Jude 1:3 – “Dear friends, although I was very eager to write to you about the salvation we share, I felt I had to write and urge you to contend for the faith that was once for all entrusted to the saints.” Thus, “the faith” would be synonymous with “the gospel.”
Fourth, faith is used in reference to a miraculous gift of the Holy Spirit. 1 Corinthians 12:8-10 – “To one there is given through the Spirit the message of wisdom, to another the message of knowledge by means of the same Spirit, 9 to another faith by the same Spirit, to another gifts of healing by that one Spirit, 10 to another miraculous powers, to another prophecy, to another distinguishing between spirits, to another speaking in different kinds of tongues, and to still another the interpretation of tongues.” Most of these miraculous gifts are easy to define while others aren’t. The exact nature of miraculous faith is one of those gifts more difficult to explain precisely.
Fifth, faith can express the idea of a personal conviction, based on our conscience. Romans 14:23 – “But the man who has doubts is condemned if he eats, because his eating is not from faith; and everything that does not come from faith is sin.” The whole context is about matters of opinion, and in these matters we must grant others liberty while living personally within our own convictions. Sixth and finally, and this is a very important usage, faith is used in a comprehensive sense that encompasses the entire faith response to God and his Son. Many passages could be cited that show this usage, including John 3:16 and Ephesians 2:8-10. However, we can get confused about how the term is being used and miss out on some essential concepts that relate directly to salvation. One way to help avoid this confusion is to realize that all faith is not saving faith.
Some Faith Does Not Please God
For starters, self-righteous faith doesn’t please God. John 8:30-33 – “Even as he spoke, many put their faith in him. 31 To the Jews who had believed him, Jesus said, ‘If you hold to my teaching, you are really my disciples. 32 Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.’ 33 They answered him, ‘We are Abraham\’s descendants and have never been slaves of anyone. How can you say that we shall be set free?’” Next, fearful faith or hidden faith certainly doesn’t please him. John 12:42-43 – “Yet at the same time many even among the leaders believed in him. But because of the Pharisees they would not confess their faith for fear they would be put out of the synagogue; 43 for they loved praise from men more than praise from God.”
Further, faith in words only, without being put into practice, is dead and cannot please God. James 2:14-17 – “What good is it, my brothers, if a man claims to have faith but has no deeds? Can such faith save him? 15 Suppose a brother or sister is without clothes and daily food. 16 If one of you says to him, ‘Go, I wish you well; keep warm and well fed,’ but does nothing about his physical needs, what good is it? 17 In the same way, faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by action, is dead.”
What Is the Faith That Pleases God?
My favorite passage to define a saving faith is Hebrews 11:6 – “And without faith it is impossible to please God, because anyone who comes to him must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who earnestly seek him.” It shouldn’t be surprising that the three components of faith that apply most directly to man’s response to God are all included in this definition of a faith that pleases God. First, it is a faith that believes. Second, it is a faith that trusts. Third, it is a faith that earnestly seeks. Thus, a saving faith is comprised of faith, trust and obedience. But what do we believe and what do we trust and what do we obey?
It is important to note that true faith is directly tied to the Word of God, as Romans 10:17 tells us: “faith comes from hearing the message, and the message is heard through the word of Christ.” So, in short, faith is based on the gospel message about Jesus. Another key to understanding saving faith is to realize that the Bible comes to us in the form of facts, promises and commands. Hence, we believe the facts, we trust the promises and we obey the commands. A faith that pleases God is simply one that takes him at his word – believing facts, trusting promises and obeying commands.
Matthew 28:19-20 is what we call the Great Commission, and it has two parts to it – becoming a disciple of Jesus (getting saved) and then maturing as a saved disciple by learning to obey everything that he has commanded. Now let’s look at an example of someone in the Book of Acts doing that first part, as the salvation process is shown to include all three parts of the type of faith that pleases God and results in salvation.
Acts 16:25-34
About midnight Paul and Silas were praying and singing hymns to God, and the other prisoners were listening to them. 26 Suddenly there was such a violent earthquake that the foundations of the prison were shaken. At once all the prison doors flew open, and everyone’s chains came loose. 27 The jailer woke up, and when he saw the prison doors open, he drew his sword and was about to kill himself because he thought the prisoners had escaped. 28 But Paul shouted, “Don’t harm yourself! We are all here!” 29 The jailer called for lights, rushed in and fell trembling before Paul and Silas. 30 He then brought them out and asked, “Sirs, what must I do to be saved?” 31 They replied, “Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved—you and your household.” 32 Then they spoke the word of the Lord to him and to all the others in his house. 33 At that hour of the night the jailer took them and washed their wounds; then immediately he and all his household were baptized. 34 The jailer brought them into his house and set a meal before them; he was filled with joy because he had come to believe in God—he and his whole household.
The jailor asked a very basic question about how to get saved, and Paul’s answer was also basic, starting with the need to believe. Of course, the jailor and his family had to know what to believe, which led to Paul preaching the Word to him, because belief must be based on the Word of Christ (Romans 10:17). Repentance is also a part of the salvation process, and washing the wounds of Paul and Silas demonstrated that the jailor and his family had repented. Finally, they were baptized, the final step in the initial salvation process. (See my article on this site entitled “Biblical Baptism Explained” for further details.) Note that their baptism took place after midnight, and by taking prisoners out of jail, they were putting themselves at risk if Paul and Silas were not being honest with their intentions. It would be difficult to come to any other conclusion than the fact that baptism is a part of the salvation process. But it is a part of the process because it is a part of the faith process. Notice the wording of verse 34: “he was filled with joy because he had come to believe in God.” Coming to believe in God summed up the entire salvation process from start to finish, from hearing the message and believing it to being baptized into the death of Christ (Romans 6:3-4).
But now let’s take a look at ourselves if we have already done that – where are you in the maturation process, in becoming more and more like Jesus? The second part of the Great Commission is by far the most challenging, for it encompasses obeying all that he has commanded and it lasts a lifetime. Where is your faith in continuing to make Jesus the Lord (Master) of your life? I expect most of us don’t struggle with believing the facts of the Bible. But how about trusting the promises of the Bible? Perhaps the quickest answer to that question comes from an examination of our anxiety level. It has been said that anxiety is practical atheism. That is surely a disturbing definition for many. I recall the wife of an elder being quite a worrier. I once mentioned to her that studies have shown that about 95% of what we worry about never comes to pass. She replied: “Exactly. I am keeping many things from becoming realities!” A relative of a minister’s wife known for negativity said of her, “Well, given her negative outlook on life, at least she is never disappointed!” How about you ─ are you an anxiety prone person as a disciple? The answer to that question says a lot about your faith, the trust you have in God’s promises.
Then, how are you doing in obeying the commands of the Bible – have you been satisfied with obeying certain ones, but yet not taking seriously what Jesus said about obeying everything he commanded? Certainly we could delve into many topics when considering this question, but some specifics come to mind as I consider the lives of church members I observe regularly. I think about participation in all of the activities of the church that the leaders have asked us to participate in. I think about finances and giving of both time and money. I think about evangelism through the example of Jesus (who came to “seek and save the lost” ─ Luke 19:10). I think about a number of other basics of what it means to follow and imitate Jesus, knowing the human tendency to pick and choose what we find comfortable or enjoyable. That approach ultimately leads to a rejection of God’s Word as a whole, and can so deceive us that we don’t even see it. Faith in accepting Jesus initially must lead to an ever maturing faith that causes us to become more and more like him all the days of our lives.
I love the term faith, partly because of its complexity and therefore its richness. For those wanting to enter a saved relationship with God through Christ, it is essential that we understand this richness and respond appropriately. For those of us who have already entered this relationship, we have to continue to examine our faith and ask especially about how well we are doing with trusting the promises and obeying the commands of the Bible. For all of us, we would do well to take these words of Jesus to heart, as he said in Matthew 7:21: “Not everyone who says to me, \’Lord, Lord,\’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven.” Let’s make sure that we are doing his will ─ with an understanding mind based on the Scriptures and a grateful heart that produces the needed trust and obedience. Then our hearts will be entwined with his heart for us! “We love because he first loved us” (1 John 4:19).
BIBLICAL BAPTISM EXPLAINED
The Commonly Accepted Viewpoint
The standard approach of Protestant churches (including those who immerse adults) is that a person is saved at the point of faith (their definition of faith) and then baptized at some later point. Baptism is often described as “an outward sign of an inward grace” or as a “demonstration to others of what has already occurred between a person and God.” In other words, baptism is much like observing the Lord’s Supper ─ it is an act of one who is already a Christian.
This definition of faith is incomplete and therefore needs a closer examination biblically. The passages used to supposedly prove salvation by faith without baptism are the ones which mention only the words “faith” or “belief.” This approach necessitates the ignoring of other passages which do mention baptism. A common line of argument is that since many more passages mention faiththan mention baptism, faith must be the essential ingredient while baptism is important but not essential. The ultimate result of such reasoning is that baptism passages have to be explained away, and even faith passages have to be taken out of context.
Romans 10:9-10 is often quoted as proof that we are saved without baptism. However, these verses cannot be used to exclude baptism from the salvation process ─ for several reasons. One, chapter 10 follows chapter 6, and in verses 1-4 of that earlier chapter, baptism is clearly taught to be a part of dying to sin and being raised to begin a new life. Two, “trust” in verse 11 and “call on him” in verse 12 go farther than simply believing and confessing. The progression in verses 14-15 is preaching, hearing, believing, and calling. Calling on the name of the Lord includes baptism, as may be readily seen in Acts 2:21, 38, and also in Acts 22:16. In Acts 2:21, Peter quotes from Joel 2:32 which reads: “And everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.” Then, when the people ask, in essence, just how to do that, Peter tells them to repent and be baptized for the forgiveness of their sins (Acts 2:37-38). Acts 22:16 is even clearer, as Paul is told to “Get up, be baptized and wash your sins away, calling on his name.”
Three, an even more important aspect of Romans 10:9-10 is the focus of the context. Paul is talking about the Jews who had failed to accept Christ, and addressing the reasons for that rejection. He was making the point beginning in verse 5 that the righteousness which comes by faith is not a complex issue nor an unreachable goal. God has already done the difficult work by sending his Son to the cross. Now in response to what he has done, we just need to accept him as Lord and Messiah. That was the challenge to the Jew. Being baptized was not a hard concept for them. It had been a part of John’s ministry, and large numbers of Jews had accepted it at his hands. Matthew 3:5-6 says that “People went out to him from Jerusalem and all Judea and the whole region of the Jordan. Confessing their sins, they were baptized by him in the Jordan River.” Proselytes to Judaism were customarily baptized as an initiation rite into Judaism. Therefore, Paul had no reason to mention baptism again in this chapter. That was not their stumbling block.
The problem that the Jew did have was in accepting Jesus as the Messiah to which their Law had pointed, and to then make this crucified Jew from despised Nazareth their Lord and King. Now that was a challenge! This background focus explains why the passage was worded as it was. Similarly, the problem with Gentile acceptance of the gospel was repentance. Therefore, Luke focused on that need all through the Book of Luke. In fact, his account of the Great Commission only mentions repentance. “He told them, ‘This is what is written: The Christ will suffer and rise from the dead on the third day, and repentance and forgiveness of sins will be preached in his name to all nations, beginning at Jerusalem” (Luke 24:46-47). The lack of Luke specifically naming faith in this account does not mean that he was excluding it from the conversion process. He was simply focusing on their principal challenge. Thus, Luke’s approach follows exactly the same principle used by Paul in Romans 10. Paul was addressing the main stumbling block for the Jews and Luke was addressing the main stumbling block for the Gentiles.
But what about those who do immerse adults as this “outward sign of an inward grace”? How should we view their baptisms? More importantly, how does God view them? The understanding and convictions with which we respond to God’s teaching on any subject either validate or invalidate the response. Christianity is a religion of motive and purpose. Outward acts, without the proper understanding in the heart of the person involved, have never been acceptable to God. Under the Mosaic Law, even the sacrifices were to be offered with a clear grasp of the purposes behind them. The statutes in the Pentateuch spell out these purposes in no uncertain terms. Likewise, the New Testament defines the purposes of baptismvery plainly. Baptism is for the forgiveness of sins (Acts 2:38; 22:16), the point at which one is born again (John 3:3-5), the means of entering a relationship with Christ where salvation is (Galatians 3:27; 2 Timothy 2:10), and the act which places us into the one body which God promised to save (1 Corinthians 12:13; Ephesians 4:4; 5:23).
A real question is this: “Can one be taught incorrectly and baptized correctly? Let’s use an interesting example to help us think through this question. Certainly a person could sing, pray, give, and partake of the Lord’s Supper in a wrong manner. This being true (and surely no one would disagree on these matters), one can also be baptized in a wrong manner, even if the person is sincere. For the sake of illustration, let us consider a hypothetical case involving the Lord’s Supper. Someone could be taught to partake every Sunday, but be taught wrongly concerning the purpose. He could be told that in partaking, he is to remember Christ as the agent in creation (and he was ─ John 1:1-3), rather than as our sacrifice. The person involved would be observing the Supper regularly for a sincere religious motive, but for the wrong purpose. Would God accept this worship? Would not the traditions of men make this worship vain (Matthew 15:9)?
Likewise, sincere and even “religious” purposes in the act of baptism can be unacceptable to God. The evangelical denominations who teach that baptism is “an outward sign of an inward grace” teach those being baptized that they are baptized after they are saved, and not in order to be saved. This is totally unscriptural. Consider Colossians 2:12: “Having been buried with him in baptism and raised with him through your faith in the power of God…” We are raised to walk a new life (as Romans 6:4 also mentions) through our personal faith in the power of God in the act of baptism itself. How can our “faith in the power of God” be transferred to another act (belief alone), and another time (before baptism), and still be acceptable?
Some are opposed to “re-baptism” but Paul was not (Acts 19:1-5). These whom Paul baptized had previously been immersed according to John the Baptist’s teaching, but needed to be immersed according to Christ’s teaching of the Great Commission baptism. Bear in mind that Jesus Himself administered the baptism of John at one time (through his disciples ─ John 4:1-2). However, after the cross only one baptism was acceptable (Ephesians 4:5), and that was the baptism of the new covenant. Although other baptisms are mentioned in the NT, by the time Ephesians was written, only one remained as a necessary part of our response to God.
A few years later, Peter wrote that “this water symbolizes baptism that now saves you also ─ not the removal of dirt from the body but the pledge of a good conscience toward God. It saves you by the resurrection of Jesus Christ” (1 Peter 3:21). Thus, this one baptism was water baptism, and it was connected to salvation. Any variation of this baptism was not acceptable to Paul, and it should not be to those of us today who are seriously trying to follow the Bible. No one can be taught incorrectly and then baptized correctly. The logical and biblical route to take should be obvious, and certainly God would not be displeased with any person who was doing all that he could to conform to accurate teaching. I have never found an honest and sincere person who was satisfied for long with a questionable baptism once taught accurately.
Bible Baptism: Inseparably Connected To Faith
Properly understood, baptism is a response of faith to the cross. Romans 6:3-4 says that “all of us who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? We were therefore buried with him through baptism into death in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, we too may live a new life.” Far from being a “work”, as some claim we teach, baptism is a recognition that we are hopelessly lost in sin without the death of Jesus, and a commitment of our hearts to him and the cross. Biblically, baptism is inseparably connected to faith in the substitutionary death of Christ on the cross.
As has already been explained, many are taught that a person is saved by faith only, without further acts of obedience. This view is held by a majority of people in the religious world, especially by those in evangelical churches. It is true that the Bible often just mentions faith in connection with salvation. The key issue is how the Bible actually defines this faith that saves us. Of course other passages command repentance, confession, and baptism, but these are in the minority. Since this is the case, people are prone to line up the majority passages against the minority passages, claiming that faith is essential while the commands in the other category are optional. This pits Scripture against itself and is therefore erroneous. Several approaches can be taken in answering this misconception of faith only.
One such approach is to explain that faith mentioned alone is a common figure of speech where the part is used when the whole is intended (synecdoche). Usually faith is mentioned since it is the beginning point out of which all other conditions grow. Even though faith is the salvation term most often used in connection with this figure of speech, other salvation terms are also used in this way. The Great Commission of Luke (24:44-49) mentions that “repentance and forgiveness of sins should be preached.” Since faith is not mentioned, it is obvious that repentance is mentioned as a part of the whole process of salvation which would certainly include faith. Obviously, when the term “faith” is used in this manner, it is meant to include all other aspects of the salvation process, including both repentance and baptism.
Another approach to clarifying the steps of salvation is to compare the passages containing these steps of obedience to a recipe. All items must be included which pertain to the end product. A cake recipe may place sugar and shortening on the top of the list, but these alone would not make a cake. The Bible recipe for salvation may place faith by itself in some passages, but the recipe is not complete without the rest of the list. In this manner, the Bible forms a pattern, and therefore all parts must be considered before the recipe is complete and salvation secured.
A third approach can be well demonstrated with examples of conversions in Acts. In three such cases, the teaching sounds like it differs, but it simply corresponded with the people’s present position. For example, a man traveling from Texas to New York may ask what the distance is while still in Texas. The answer he receives will be different from the answer to the same question asked when he is halfway to New York. In both cases, the answer is based on his present position. Similarly, the Philippian jailer was told to believe (Acts 16:31) because he was just beginning his trip to salvation. The audience on Pentecost had already believed, so they were told to “repent and be baptized” (Acts 2:38). Saul was already a repentant believer when he was told to “get up and be baptized” (Acts 22:16). In each case, the command was based on the present position of those being addressed.
The last approach that we will mention is more detailed, but possibly the most effective when trying to help a person who is really grounded in the faith only doctrine. In this approach, we show that the Bible uses the term “faith” in both a restricted sense and in a general comprehensive sense. Many passages use belief as a type of mental assent, which would be the narrow or restricted sense. For example, Acts 18:8 states that “many of the Corinthians who heard him believed and were baptized.” Something besides faith is mentioned, so faith here is used in the narrow sense. Other similar passages are Acts 11:21; Mark 16:16; John 12:42; and James 2:19.
The general or comprehensive use of faith is seen in passages like John 3:16; John 20:30-31; Romans 1:16; and Acts 4:4. The familiar statement in John 3:16 that “whoever believes in him should not perish” actually includes baptism rather than excluding it. This point may be demonstrated by considering such passages as John 3:36, which states: “Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life, but whoever rejects the Son will not see life…” The NASB provides a more literal translation as it contrasts faith and obedience in these words: “He who believes in the Son has eternal life; but he who does not obey the Son shall not see life…”
Notice that belief and obedience are used interchangeably in the two phrases. Here belief is used in the broader general sense and is synonymous with obedience. See Acts 14:1-2; 19:1-3; Acts 16:30-34; and, Hebrews 3:18-19 for further illustrations of the same principle. In both of the Acts accounts, it is obvious that the phrases “when you believed” and “he had come to believe” included the act of baptism. Understood correctly, these passages will show that faith is often used in a manner that includes all obedience, of which baptism is a part.
Several additional illustrations and analogies also should prove helpful in establishing the proper relationship of faith to baptism. The fall of Jericho illustration is one such approach. In Joshua 6:2, God said that he had given (past tense) the city into the hands of the Israelites. Surely no one can doubt that the promised victory was a gift from God and not earned by works! However, God then places specific conditions on the reception of the gift (such as walking around the city a number of times). But when the conditions were met, the promises were received, and they were received by faith. Hebrews 11:30 reads: “By faith the walls of Jericho fell, after the people had marched around them for seven days.” Bottom line, faith receives the promises of God, when the conditions (if any are specified) are met! Faith does save us, but when does it save? That is the issue. In the NT setting, our faith saves when we obey the conditions which God has given us.
Another illustration concerns a marriage analogy. In the OT, a beautiful lesson may be learned by showing that God married the nation of Israel at Mount Sinai, and through her, had a son named Jesus. Many Scriptures fit into this analogy. As with all marriages (except arranged ones!), the beginning point of the relationship is an attraction to one another. In the NT analogy, Jesus was attracted to us enough to leave heaven in order to win us over. When we became aware of his love, his miracles and his teaching, then the attraction became mutual! However, it must be kept in mind that a mutual attraction does not mean that we are married yet. For example, I was strongly attracted to my wife, Theresa, well over 50 years ago when we were both in high school. Amazingly, she was also strongly attracted to me! (There is a God!) But when we were merely high school sweethearts, no one would have called her Mrs. Ferguson. A few years later, they started doing that, but only after we were married.
But, back to the analogy of our relationship to Jesus. How does this attraction develop into a marriage relationship? Actually, much like it develops between a man and a woman! After the attraction stage, we then move to the going steady stage. Others are ruled out in favor of this special one. The Bible calls this stage repentance! Then this stage leads to an engagement ─ in biblical terms, we are now really counting the cost! Finally, we go through the legal procedures which are required in order to be officially married. In the spiritual realm, this ceremony (the entrance into the covenant) is described simply and beautifully with these words: “for all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ (Galatians 3:27).” At this point, we are now married to the Lord according to the official requirement of God himself (the Bible)! See Ephesians 5:22-33 for this analogy, especially verse 32, and also 2 Corinthians 11:2.
Another explanation had to do with getting intoChrist. The blessings of being “in” Christ (in a relationship with him) are mentioned in such passages as 2 Timothy 2:10; Romans 8:1; and, Ephesians 1:3. Only three passages in the NT tell us specifically how to get “into” Christ: Romans 6:3; 1 Corinthians 12:13; and, Galatians 3:27. All are baptism passages. Thus, baptism is the culminating act of faith through which we enter that precious relationship with Jesus.
Further, note that in John 8:31-32, holding to the teachingindicates more than faith. Here the people were listening to Jesus and “even as he spoke, many put their faith in him” (verse 30). Yet, in verses 31-32, Jesus makes it clear that much more was demanded. Similarly, in John 12:42, many “believed in him” but would not confess it. Therefore, their faith was not biblical saving faith at all! (See Mark 8:38.)
Another issue often arises with those who are confused about the relationship of faith and baptism. That issue is usually raised with this question: “But what about the thief on the cross ─ he wasn’t baptized?” Whether or not he was baptized no one knows. Since huge numbers of people had been baptized by John (Matthew 3:5-6), he might well have been. However, this is not the main consideration. This issue is a covenant issue. Jesus himself lived and died under the Judaic covenant as described in the Old Testament. The Great Commission baptism was not required nor preached until the day of Pentecost as described in Acts 2. No one could have experienced this baptism before then because it was a baptism into the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus. It was not possible before Jesus accomplished these things, nor could it have been required until the new covenant went into effect. Read Hebrews 9:15-17 with this principle in mind.
For this reason Christ is the mediator of a new covenant, that those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance–now that he has died as a ransom to set them free from the sins committed under the first covenant. In the case of a will, it is necessary to prove the death of the one who made it, because a will is in force only when somebody has died; it never takes effect while the one who made it is living.
Therefore, what the thief did or did not do has little to do with us. We live in the times of the new covenant and are thus under its requirements. And one of those requirements is the one baptism of the Great Commission.
One final approach may prove helpful in trying to move a resistant person who is blocked is his understanding of baptism by his denominational background. Take out a sheet of paper and write down these two opposite statements:
Baptism that now saves you also.
Baptism that now does not save you also.
Then hand them a pen and ask them to mark out the statement that is not true. If they mark out the first one, they mark out 1 Peter 3:21! If they mark out the second one, they admit that their doctrine is wrong. Forcing the issue in this way is not the place to start, but if nothing else works, it is worth a try. Everyone needs to see and accept what the Bible says about this important salvation issue.
In conclusion, faith is man’s response to God. Hebrews 11:6 provides us with a great definition of a saving faith. “And without faith it is impossible to please God, because anyone who comes to him must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who earnestly seek him.” This passage identifies three aspects of such a faith: belief, trust, and obedience. The faithful person believes the facts in the Bible; he trusts thepromises in the Bible; and, he obeys the commands in the Bible. Therefore, faith which pleases God is the appropriate response to his Word. We cannot obey a fact, nor can we simply believe a command. We must match our response to the form of teaching found, thereby taking God at his Word. Since we are commanded to be baptized, our obedience to that command is not faith plus baptism. It is simply faith in the cross when being baptized into Jesus. (Please see the more complete article on this web site regarding the biblical definition of faith in its various uses entitled, “Are We Saved by Faith Alone?”)
At first glance, that is an unusual title, isn’t it? It could bring to mind someone who was pressed into leadership out of pure necessity, although leadership wasn’t his or her gift (Romans 12:8). Sometimes the need does in fact call for such a decision and those who serve in such situations are to be commended for their efforts. However, I am using the title in another way, a way that may seem unusual, but with closer examination I think you will agree that it is a perfectly normal and necessary part of true spiritual leadership.
Although I have authored one book on leadership (Dynamic Leadership) and co-authored another (Golden Rule Leadership), I am always trying to learn more about such a vital subject. I believe that we have wonderful disciples of Jesus in our churches who want to be their best for God, and who will do about as well as they are led to do. That realization makes me want to keep growing as a leader in order to better help them grow as Christians. Further, the more you learn about any subject, the more you become aware of how much more there is yet to learn. I certainly view my knowledge of spiritual leadership in exactly that way. I’ve much still to learn.
So, what do I mean by the term “unnatural leader?” Actually, several related things. In the Golden Rule Leadership book that Wyndham Shaw and I co-authored years ago, we made a point about the importance of leading in an age-appropriate way. The parent who tries to lead their fifteen year old child the same way that they led them when they were five is headed for conflict and likely rebellion. The ministry leader who tries to lead a 45 year old disciple in the same way they led that same person when they were a new campus convert 25 years previously is making a similar mistake. The older disciple may not openly rebel, but at the very least they will not respond by wholeheartedly following that leader.
This leads us to the observation that leaders must be flexible enough to adjust their leadership style to the needs of those whom they are leading. All true leaders have a style that is natural to them. I call it their default style – they just do what comes naturally to them. That is not good enough. One style doesn’t meet all of the needs of the different types of people being led. Thus, all leaders have to learn to expand their leadership approaches beyond their own comfort zones in ways that are unnatural. At first, doing this will feel unnatural to both the leader and those being led, but in time, it will actually become fairly natural.
Does this sound something like hypocrisy to you? After all, it puts the leader in a position to do something that seems awkward and unnatural, perhaps making them appear as someone they are not. I have watched many leaders, perhaps the majority, lead in only one primary way – the way that comes most naturally to them. If they have a leadership gift, then they may well be effective with the majority of those whom they lead. But what about the minority of their group who doesn’t respond well to their particular leadership style? Can we just say that they are poor followers and leave it at that? That’s exactly what many (most?) leaders do, by the way. As a leader, I’m not satisfied with that answer, although I’m tempted to be. What if I can expand my leadership style in ways that would actually be effective with some of those minority folks who are more difficult to lead? If I could do that, wouldn’t God expect me to do it?
If you are a parent and have a child with learning difficulties or other behavioral challenges outside the norm, you can answer that question for us rather quickly, can’t you? You want teachers who adapt to the needs of your child, not teachers who just dismiss those needs because it is too much trouble to deal with them. Do you really think God wants those who lead his kids to just dismiss the needs of those who are more difficult to work with?
What are the real biblical issues involved here? “Whoever wants to be my disciple must deny themselves and take up their cross daily and follow me” (Luke 9:23). Oh, you mean that this verse about self-denial and taking up daily crosses might just apply to me as a leader? “in humility value others above yourselves, not looking to your own interests but each of you to the interests of the others” (Philippians 2:3-4). So now you are saying that these verses also apply to more than just ordinary Christian relationships − that they also apply to leader/follower relationships? Does not agape love demand that we do all that we can in any capacity to help every person as much as we can possibly help them, no matter the amount of sacrifice demanded on our parts?
Perhaps I’ve asked more questions than I’ve answered, but the answers are pretty obvious aren’t they? Being a leader is not about me; it’s about God first of all and then about his children. I don’t lead just because it’s my “thing.” I lead because God has given me a gift that carries a huge responsibility with it, the responsibility to help as many people as possible get right with God and then grow to be more and more like Christ. Every aspect of being a disciple is about the imitation of Christ in every area, especially in the area of leadership because of its increased influence on others.
Some leaders find it natural to be very challenging in their style and they love the passages that describe Jesus rebuking the Pharisees or turning over the tables of the money changers in the temple. Now that’s real leadership, right? That same Jesus had this said of him: “A bruised reed he will not break, and a smoldering wick he will not snuff out…” (Matthew 12:20). That seems a bit different leadership style, used no doubt on those who were weak and damaged both emotionally and spiritually.
Other leaders find it natural to be gentle and encouraging. They love the Matthew 12 passage, but are uncomfortable with the Jesus who overturned those tables and rebuked the Pharisees. They pick and choose which parts of Paul’s well-rounded admonition in 2 Timothy 4:2 they want to follow: “Preach the word; be prepared in season and out of season; correct, rebuke and encourage—with great patience and careful instruction.” They are good with the encouraging, the patience and even the careful instruction, but they are not so good with the correcting and rebuking parts.
Leadership is about leading in the most effective way for the most people possible. 1 Thessalonians 5:14 demands that you adapt and expand your leadership style to meet those varied needs: “And we urge you, brothers and sisters, warn those who are idle and disruptive, encourage the disheartened, help the weak, be patient with everyone.” (Note that Paul is addressing all disciples here, not just leaders.) Leaders are not called to lead within their natural personalities and comfort zones; they are called to lead like Jesus. They give encouragement when that is most needed by whomever they are leading; they give a timely rebuke when that is what is most needed. Neither discipleship nor leadership is about you doing what comes naturally. Following Jesus in any area and in any capacity means that we deny what comes naturally and do what is right before God, and through such heartfelt obedience, we will become like Jesus and what was once unnatural will become natural or at least much more natural. All leaders have to deal with their selfishness, and it comes in many forms. But if we take seriously the imitation of Christ as a lifelong process, the words of the old hymn will become an increasing reality in our lives: “Less of self, and more of Thee; none of self, and all of Thee.”