Romans 6: Obedience to the Gospel!
Michael Demory
The apostle Paul has been unduly misrepresented in his teachings from his letter to the Roman Christians (Jew and Gentile). It is argued (and falsely I might add) that Paul is at odds with James, which would mean that the Holy Spirit was at odds with Himself when He inspired these men to write their message. If not, why not? If the purveyors of error would only stop and consider how their twisting of the Scriptures casts doubt in God teaching us the truth, by carrying out their doctrine to its logical end, they hopefully would repent and support the truth. As all Scripture is “breathed out” (inspired) of God (2 Tim. 3:16-17), the words of the authors of each letter in the New Testament are the words of God, even though humans were the instruments God used to record His words. When one twists, eliminates, adds to God’s word, they have become like the Jews of old who blasphemed God by denying Jesus was and still is the Christ. No amount of word smithing, that teaches the opposite of God’s will, should be worth the condemnation of one’s soul. It is evident that all who argue against the command to be baptized are functioning through what is referred to as “Motivated Reasoning” which is a biased approach to Scripture based on their own belief and not the truth. This type of reasoning causes one to favor what “evidence” supports their view while dismissing evidence that contradicts it, even though such evidence is more credible. Such false reasoning also interjects irrational arguments that are apples and oranges compared to the passage they are working to disparage. To teach others a gospel other than that given to the apostles, that pardons men of their sins before and without obedience to the gospel of Christ dishonors Christ and leads men and women to a false hope.
In his letter to the Romans, Paul stated, “We who died to sin, how shall we any longer live therein? Or are you ignorant that all we who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into His death?” (Rom. 6:2-4 ASV). These verses are of great important to every accountable human being, because they demonstrate the force of water baptism in bringing a penitent believer into Christ where “we have redemption through His blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses, according to the riches of His grace” (Eph. 1:7). Romans 6:2-6 clearly indicate for the honest minded person how every alien sinner is able to acquire a saving relationship to the death of Christ. It’s not by grace alone, through faith alone in Jesus alone. No such statement is found anywhere in all of the Bible. Only by motivated reasoning can it be argued that verses “imply” such nonsense.
Remember, Paul is speaking to Christian Jews and Gentiles, members of the church of Christ in Rome, reminding them how they became saved individuals, members of the church (Acts 2:47). After having focused his letter in the first 5 chapters to the Jewish brethren, because their belief the Gentiles were unfit for salvation, Paul now speaks to both. In other words, both the Jews in Rome and the Gentiles in Roman had been immersed in water for the purpose of gaining the benefits of Christ’s death at Calvary (vs. 3). Remission or forgiveness of sins is one of those benefits. As Paul told the Ephesian Christians, “All spiritual blessings are in Christ” (Eph. 1:3). “In” Christ, (Locative case—location/position). The question is, how did the Christians in Rome get into Christ, to gain the benefits of His death? According to the motivated reasoning of the naysayers of baptism, they must turn to a verse that is out of context with Galatians 3:27 and Romans 6, that teaches it is the indwelling of the Holy Spirit that baptizes us into the body of Christ (John 1:33-34). Wow, bet you didn’t see that one coming! Why are they utterly incorrect in their hermeneutics? Because John 1:33-34 is speaking of a promised baptism, not a commanded baptism. Jesus promised several baptisms (Holy Spirit, fire, suffering, et al), but He only commanded one—water immersion (Mark 16:16; Matt. 28:19; Acts 2:38)! And yes, Acts is a commandment of Christ as it is His Gospel, even though we find no red letters in any of the epistles (which were added by the translators). Therefore, it is dishonest to use a promise to defend one’s position, unless the promise happens to speak of our inheritance, hope, eternal life, etc. But to mix a promise with a command is a matter of poor interpretation methods, as well as a lack of proper reasoning.
Paul’s praise of the Roman Christians obedience gospel, in which is included immersion in water in order to gain the benefits of Christ’s death were found centuries earlier in the type or shadow of the Israelites baptism into Moses. Crossing the Red Sea from Egypt to the wilderness means that through their obedience to Moses command to pass over, the Israelites came into possession of the deliverance in which Moses led them. Their baptism under the cloud took them out of Egyptian bondage to freedom. Yet, Calvinists falsely argue that the word eis in 1 Corinthians 10:2 cannot mean “in order to get,” because the Israelites were not baptized in order to get Moses to be their leader. Rather, they were baptized because he was their leader and led them out of Egypt. It is then their contention that if one were consistent with the proposition eis when used in conjunction with baptism, then it can never mean “in order to obtain” but because forgiveness had been received. The problem with this argument is that eis is never used to point back to something, but always to point forward to something. As it is in the example of Jonah and the Ninevites. Their repentance was a result (fruit) of the preaching of Jonah. In other words, since eis “in order to” looks forward to something, the Ninevites repented escape the punishment set forth in Jonah’s preaching. Such an understanding is in perfect harmony with strict meaning of the proposition. Had Matthew meant to say “because of” he would have used the proposition dia (because of) as found in—Matthew 13:21; 17:20; 27:18; Mark 3:9; 6:6; Luke 5:19; 11:8; 23:25; John 3:29; 4:42; 7:13; 10:19; 12:11, et al. Therefore, Paul’s use of eis in Romans 6:3 must be understood in the strict meaning of the word, “In order to.” I find it odd, that in all their usage of passages where eis is found in connection to remission/forgiveness of sins (which water immersion is definitely connected), not one word is ever offered concerning Matthew 26:28: “For this is My blood of the testament, which is shed for many “for” (in order to) the remission of sins.” I guess they realize it destroys their argument, as Jesus would have died at Calvary because our sins would have already been forgiven. In other words, our debt had already been paid before Jesus shed His blood. Of course to be consistent, they would have to say this passage does not make sense saying that eis means “because of,” to which we would agree.
Their argument for Romans 6:3 that “unto or into” Jesus Christ means they were baptized because of Jesus’ death, does not fit the context of the chapter. But who cares about context, right? After all, keeping the context makes it very hard to twist the Word of God, and we don’t want that. As a matter of fact we do want to maintain the context of the Bible. That is the only way to properly interpret what each author wanted his readers to understand. Paul asks these brethren whether or not they remember they were baptized in order to obtain the benefits of Christ’s death (remission of sins)? Then from verses 4-6, he reiterates the purpose of water baptism (immersion)—(1) It is dying to sin, (2) it is a burial, and (3) it is a resurrection. Sounds a lot like the definition of the Gospel. In verse 17 of Romans 6, Paul thanks God on behalf of the faithful brethren that they chose to “obey from the heart that pattern of teaching which Paul had delivered to them.” That pattern of teaching was the gospel, the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ (1 Cor. 15:1-4). To be saved, and have the promise of eternal life, one must obey the Gospel, that same pattern of the Gospel followed and obeyed by the Roman Christians.
Paul told the Thessalonians, “…when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with His mighty angels, in flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ” (2 Thess. 7-8).
Obeying the Gospel includes water immersion, and without water immersion, Christ’s vengeance will be taken upon you. Peter also spoke of obedience to the gospel (1 Pet. 4:17). Following the pattern of the Gospel as the Romans did—Death, burial and resurrection. We are buried in water immersion where we die to sin, the blood of Christ is applied to our account washing away our sins, and are then resurrected to walk a new life in Christ. None of this can be accomplished through faith alone, then being immersed as a symbol of one’s salvation previously given. The following logical argument makes the point:
-
If through the act of water immersion a penitent believer is cleansed of all past sins by the blood of Jesus Christ, then salvation does not and cannot occur prior to or without water immersion.
-
It is the case that, through the act of water immersion a penitent believer is cleansed of all past sins by the blood of Jesus Christ (Rom. 6:3-5; Gal. 3:27; 1 John 1:7; 1 Pet. 1:19).
-
Therefore, salvation from all past sins does not and cannot occur prior to or without water immersion.
As the premises are true, then the conclusion necessarily follows.
The Christians at Rome, had obeyed from the faith the pattern of the Gospel, by submitting themselves to being immersed in water in order to contact the saving blood of Jesus Christ and have all their past sins remitted. They could not be pardoned before and without water immersion, nor can anyone today. We are in no way discounting the importance of faith, as it is required by God, and necessary to motivate one to repent and confess Christ. What we do believe however, is that salvation is not be faith alone, which is the same thing those against baptism believe. They argue they are saved by faith alone, but then they add to it grace, repentance, confession, and the blood of Christ. It is logically impossible for something to be alone when it has other things added to it. That would be like saying, “I went to the movies alone.” Yet with me were 4 of my friends. The baptism nay sayers love to cast aspersions upon those understanding that baptism is necessary for salvation, as being inconsistent, when the fact is that they are the one’s being inconsistent.
If your interpretation of a passage of Scripture does not fit or harmonize with other passages, then admit your error in interpretation, and reexamine the passage until there are no disagreements with other Scriptures. It is dishonest to use on passage like Ephesians 2:8 as the standard of interpretation for the subject of salvation, and all passages that do not agree with your view, requires twisting the definition of words or the entire passage itself. That is what has been done when it comes to the subject of baptism. You would think those against baptism were “Aquaphobic.” which would mean they are the dirtiest people on earth. But we know that is not the case since they are immersed after their supposed salvation—which is not salvation at all, but the devil’s lie. Their cart before the horse salvation has sadly caused a false hope in hundreds of millions. Billy Graham being one of the worst purveyors of the cart doctrine, just so he could be somewhat (Gal. 2:6).
Faith is unto (Rom. 10:10); repentance is unto (Acts 11:18); confession is unto (Rom. 10:10); however, baptism is into. It is immersion in water that transforms the penitent believer from an outsider, to an insider—putting one into Christ. Is that not what Paul taught in Gal. 3:26-27)? Anyone honest person would have to admit the answer is yes, and there is no “Negative Inference” fallacy that implies the opposite is true, that anyone answering no, is dishonest, because it is true, as proved by the logical argument on the previous page. There can be no salvation if one is not located in Christ. There can be no eternal life if one is not located in Christ. There can be no inheritance if one is not located in Christ. There can be no forgiveness of past sins if one has chosen not to be in Christ.
The only way for God to abide in us, is for us to abide in His doctrine, the Gospel, and faith alone is not abiding in Christ’s doctrine. Something both Paul and James clearly agreed on. That baptism is what locates us in Christ. Also, that there are works that God requires of us to obtain the benefits of Christ’s death. First of all an active obedient faith as demonstrated several times in Hebrews 11. Said active obedient faith must then motivate us to repent of our sins (Luke 13:3; Acts 17:30; 2 Pet. 3:9); the confess that Jesus is the Christ (Rom. 10:9-10), and finally, submit to being immersed in water in order to obtain the benefits of Christ’s death, namely His shed blood that remits our sins. Without these prerequisites, our sins will not be forgiven, we will not become fellow heirs with Christ, no receive the hope of heaven.
Faith without works is a dead faith. A faith that will do nothing to the saving of our souls. (Jas. 2:26). Our must be an active, living faith that demonstrates our desire to obey God, and follow only His will. To argue that not one drop of water is found in Ephesians 2:8, and ignore that there is not one mention of repentance is to be dishonest with the text. The word faith, most often is used as the figure of speech known as a synecdoche. which means a part for the whole. Like the farmer that says he had 100 head of cattle. He uses the word head to represent the entirety of the cattle he has. Faith, represents everything God requires to obtain our salvation, which is the word found in Ephesians 2:8 and many other passages. We are saved by grace, which is God’s part of the plan, and we are saved by an active obedient faith that requires repentance, confession and baptism.
Is that not keeping with the context of the Bible? You bet it is. For you will not find one verse that states everything one must do to be saved. But we know there are verses that talk about repentance as necessary, and confession as necessary as well faith and baptism. So we must then rationally conclude that each requirement is necessary even though only one facet is found in a verse. If not, why not?
Paul and James were in complete agreement concerning God’s plan of salvation, because the Holy Spirit inspired them both. And if they disagreed, then the Holy Spirit, being God, lied to them both, as well as us today. Let’s please agree that God does not lie (Titus 1:2). Which means it must be our poor interpretation causing the problems.
