Does Acts 2:38 teach that baptism is necessary for salvation?

Baptism was as Peter taught "for remission of sins," as we read in Act 2:38. Hence Ananias was sent to "brother Saul," already having life in Christ risen, and bade him arise and get baptised, and have his sins washed away, calling on the Lord's name. So here "Which figure," for this it is, "also now saveth you, baptism." But the apostle carefully adds, "not a putting away of flesh's filth, but a request (or, demand) of a good conscience." For the life of Christ given to the soul seeks and can be satisfied with nothing less. And as He Who is and gives us life eternal suffered for sins, we also receive the rich blessing of His death in all its value. It figures therefore not life, as says tradition ever dark and misleading, but salvation, the present salvation of our souls, and pledge of the glorious change for our bodies at Christ's coming. Baptism sets forth our passing out of the fallen estate into the new standing of salvation "through the resurrection of Jesus Christ." All was holy and acceptable in Him incarnate; but such was our guilt, such our ruin, that nothing short of His resurrection could bring us into salvation. "Verily, verily, I say to you, Except the grain of wheat fall into the ground and die, it abideth alone; but if it die, it beareth much fruit." Remission of sins and salvation are thus part of our blessing. Baptism as the initiatory institution proclaims it; and so does the Lord's supper throughout, as we wait for Christ; but it all depends on the efficacy of His death and resurrection to our faith.

The effect of Peter's words was wonderful. Multitudes were broken under it. Realising how terribly they had compromised themselves with God by their rejection of His Son, they said to Peter and to the rest of the apostles: "Brethren, what shall we do?" The answer was as follows: "Repent, and be baptised everyone of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost." Baptism before remission! This is not God's usual order, but the very reverse. When Peter proclaimed Jesus to Cornelius and his friends, they first received the remission of their sins, then the Holy Spirit, and after that baptism was granted them (Acts 10:43-48). The usual order was departed from on the Day of Pentecost for a very important reason. Only seven weeks earlier these people had been guilty of the murder of the Son of God. They were now horrified at their sin. But under the exceptional circumstances they were not permitted to receive, either the remission of their sins or the gift of the Holy Spirit until they had been baptised in the name of the very One they had so violently rejected. Three thousand submitted to these humiliating terms, and thus signified the reality of their repentance. Their baptism put them entirely outside "the untoward generation" upon whom the vengeance of God was about to fall by the hand of the Romans.

Wonderful results followed. The Word had been preached and the power of the Holy Spirit brought the great truths to the hearts and consciences of the hearers. Their guilt in having crucified Jesus had been fully demonstrated, and now they asked, "Now, brethren, what shall we do?" Peter gives the needed answer. Repentance and baptism are the conditions. If these are fulfilled remission of sins and the gift of the Holy Spirit are promised to follow. Peter's words wrongly interpreted have led to much confusion. Upon these words doctrines, especially concerning water baptism, have been built, which are not alone nowhere else taught in the Bible, but which are opposed to the Gospel. The words of Peter to his Jewish brethren have been used to make water baptism a saving ordinance, that only by submission to water baptism, with repentance and faith in the Lord Jesus, can remission of sins and the gift of the Holy Spirit be obtained. We do not enlarge upon these unscriptural conceptions nor answer the utterly false doctrine of "baptismal regeneration", but rather point out briefly what these words of Peter mean. We must bear in mind that Peter addressed those who had openly rejected Jesus. They had, therefore, also openly to acknowledge their wrong and thus openly own Him as Messiah, whom they had disowned by delivering Him into the hands of lawless men. Repentance meant for them to own their guilt in having opposed and rejected Jesus. Baptism in the name of Jesus Christ (in which it differs from the baptism of John) was the outward expression of that repentance. It was for these Jews, therefore, a preliminary necessity. And here we must not forget that Peter's preaching on the day of Pentecost had it still to do with the kingdom, as we shall more fully learn from his second address in the third chapter. Another offer of the kingdom was made to the nation. The great fact that the Holy Spirit had begun to form the body of Christ, the church, as stated before, was not revealed then. In this national testimony the word "repent" stands in the foreground, and their baptism in the name of Him whom they had crucified was a witness that they owned Him now and believed on Him.

This is a main plank in Mr. Roberts’ theology. He writes: “A man may believe in all the glorious promises of God and yet not be a participator in them. HE MUST BE BAPTISED, as we have seen; ‘He that believes and is baptised, shall be saved’” (p. 302).

Now Christian baptism is a rite which is incumbent on all who believe on the Lord Jesus Christ. The word of God makes that plain. But to make it necessary for salvation is highly unscriptural. It is dead against the tenor of Scripture. Mr. Roberts quotes a number of examples to support his theory, but in truth they are destructive of it. He quotes the Day of Pentecost, when the convicted hearers asked the apostles, “Men and brethren, what shall we do?” The answer was; “Repent, and be baptised every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost” (Acts 2:38).

A little lower down on the page, Mr. Roberts quotes in support of his view the case of Cornelius and his friends, but he fails to point out that they received the forgiveness of their sins and the gift of the Holy Spirit, BEFORE they were baptised. Would the Holy Spirit have come upon those who were unsaved? Certainly not!

Another quotation that Mr. Roberts makes shows clearly in the words of Scripture that baptism is not essential to salvation, though he quotes it in defence of his theory. It is plainly destructive of it. He quotes: “The like figure whereunto even BAPTISM DOTH ALSO NOW SAVE US (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God), by the resurrection of Jesus Christ” (1 Peter 3:20-21).

This being "saved by water" is a figure of eternal salvation; and baptism today is a similar figure. Noah and his family were saved out of an ungodly world, a type of eternal salvation. Baptism saves in a similar way, not for eternity but from a world that rejects the Lord Jesus Christ. Thus, Peter told exercised Jews, 'Save yourselves from this low untoward generation." (Acts 2:40) By being baptized they in this way publicly dissociated themselves from their own nations which had rejected the Messiah. Of course, baptism symbolizes burial (Romans 6:4) in association with Christ's death; so while baptism saves outwardly, it is only a figure of that which saves eternally that is, the precious sacrifice of Christ, the value of which is only made good to the soul by faith in Him.We have seen that baptism saves only in an outward way; and it is interesting that the true translation here is "baptism doth also now save you;" (New Trans.); not us as in the King James. There was no reason for either Peter or the other 11 apostles being baptized with Christian baptism; for they had been publicly identified with Christ from the beginning of His ministry.

Baptists whilst making so much of baptism for believers only, generally say "of course baptism does not save". How does this stand in the light of the Lord's own words already referred to in Mark 16, "He that believes and is baptised shall be saved". Note also Acts 2:38, 40-41, "Save yourselves ... they that gladly received his word were baptised". See also 1 Peter 3:21 "The like figure whereunto baptism doth now save us". So there is salvation by baptism!

Take the order of the words in Mark 16:16: He that believes and is baptized shall be saved," and does not the order here favour the view we have already given? Would not a Baptist have written it: "He that believes and is saved shall be baptized"? This is not, however, what our Lord said. The order of the words here indicates that Baptism itself is in someway connected with salvation, and does not simply represent that a person is saved. To be saved, in the sense meant here, he must not only believe but be baptized. Not because he is saved but to be saved. The reason why Baptism is omitted in the second clause is easy to understand. Damnation has to do with the future. But Baptism has only to do with the present course of things, and salvation too has a present aspect.

Acts 2:38. "Repent and be baptized every one of you in the Name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins." The revised version has "unto the remission of your sins," and Weymouth translates the word for "unto" as, "with a view to." Have we not here the same thought? Not Baptism merely retrospective, but in view of something. And this even after Christ's ascension to glory and the coming of the Holy Ghost.

Taking now a glance backward at the passages that have come before us, what have we learned? We have seen that John the Baptist did not send his hearers away telling them to come when they had given sufficient proof of amendment of life, but he baptized them in view of that. We have seen again and again that certain things are predicated of those who have been baptized. They have washed away their sins; they have put on Christ; they have been buried; and all this is said to have been done by the act of Baptism. More than once, salvation is connected with the rite, (Mark 16:16, and 1 Peter 3:21). In Acts 2:38, Baptism is said to be "for (or unto) the remission of sins," not because their sins were forgiven.

Baptism never supposes life in the one baptized though it may be there, but it always supposes death. Thus Saul was in the condition that attached to him as a sinner with sins on him, though himself safe, when he was bidden to "arise and be baptized and wash away thy sins" (Acts 22:16). His sins were not washed away, that is to say, he was outwardly connected with the first man, until baptism to Christ, and as to himself as a man on the earth was not in a Christian state till after baptism. If life were implied in baptism, would it not have been written, "Arise, and be baptized, because your sins are washed away"? Again it is said, "Repent, and be baptized, for the remissions of sins," not "because your sins are remitted," which is the ground taken by those who refuse baptism for any but believers. "They that gladly received the word were baptized," and it was "for the remission of sins"; that is to say, they could not be acknowledged as outwardly free from sin until they had in type died in the waters of death, and waters of baptism (1 Peter 3:20, 22), "wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by waters!" etc.