You make a good point in that baptism isn’t required as a part of salvation. Personally, I think the issue itself isn’t so black and white, or “either/or.”
The problem with “baptism is absolutely required” is that it would mean Jesus was lying or contradicting himself when speaking with the thief on the Cross. He’s going to die. There’s just no possible way for him to receive a physical water baptism. How can he enter the kingdom if such a physical baptism were absolutely required of that man?
The answer is that he very well just couldn’t. If he were saved in the middle of a desert, with no water nearby, are we to say that a man’s full acceptance of Christ, repentence, and all the stuff that matters is reduced to ashes because there’s no ocean nearby?
Absolute legalism, in my opinion, is the kind of stuff that muddles Christianity. Granted, there is and probably should be a “line” that we draw in the sand in regards to certain issues. But in terms of what qualifies for salvation, we often focus too much on the things that are focused too much on physical ritual and dependence rather than the stuff that one can do without need of “water nearby.”
Baptism is one of those issues. Should you, as a true believer, do what all the apostles, and everyone else did, including the Messiah himself, in terms of baptism?
My opinion is yes. I think it should be part of your walk. I would even go so far as to say that it’s almost required, in that you are essentially commanded in some ways to be baptised in the Holy Spirit. I’ve always read this part of Scripture as being more of a spiritual sense. I’m baptised by the Holy Spirit. However, in a show of faith, I would get the physical baptism. I could even get it two, or three more times, as a re-dedication to that faith.
But again, it’s a “show” of faith. It’s something that is pleasing and acceptable to God. But to say my soul rests in the balance of me getting such a baptism is cutting it a bit too far. If that were the case, then that opens a whole can of worms, including Human Intervention of people getting saved!
1.) I capture a bunch of non-believers, torture them, a few of them suddenly believe in Christ whole-heartedly. But I locked them in a dungeon with no water. And just to be extra careful, I tape their mouths shut so they can’t even spit on each other. I remove their tear ducts. And I use some air device to make sure they never ever sweat. No water whatsoever. Oops. They’re doomed.
2.) Christian gets saved, but throughout the walk never actively pursues the opportunity to get baptised. Maybe life’s circumstances, situations, doubts, personal lives, etc., just arranged it in such a way that the man never gets into an official church function and officially experiences a “baptism” ceremony. It can happen.
I’ve been a Christian five years+. I’ve never been an official member of any church; I move around from town to town (my immediate family does not share my beliefs, and did not raise me in the tradition). As such, I’ve never had the opportunity to really just go and be baptised, as I’m getting to know different sets of people more often than staying in the Church I’ve entered. Granted, I could go through the effort and simply demand that the ceremony be done. And I do intend on one day being baptised. The sooner the better in my opinion. But if performing a ceremony was all the remained between me and God, that raises two important ideals.
1.) If baptism is required, that means that it isn’t just Jesus that saves. It’s Jesus and his fellow Priests (who have access to water and knowledge of the annointing ceremony).
-or-
2.) We simply recognize that it is our relationship with God that counts. Human intersession doesn’t matter. The thief is proof of that. He had no opportunity for baptism. It wasn’t even mentioned. So the thief, in that sense, only needed the relationship.
Granted, in situation 2), there’s no excuse for the vast majority of us to not be baptised. If Jesus himself got baptised, then I intend to do the same. I think it’s just a natural part of the process. But to claim that I’m lost until physical baptism is too absolutist. I think there are a variety of other issues, beliefs, and patterns of what consititutes a true “follower” that should come up before someone starts talking about water rituals.
Heck, there’s even arguments on what kind of baptism you got! “Did he sprinkle your head, or did you get submerged? Don’t you know the first Gentiles and Jews were literally taken to a beach and fully drenched in the water? If so, you know now that your sprinkling wasn’t enough!”
The Church culture these days doesn’t even actively pursue getting people baptised. If you just accept Christ at a ceremony, many well-grounded Churches of various denominations won’t immediately bring out the tub of water for you. They prefer to walk you through the steps in this modern day and age rather than simply proclaim you for all to see. There’s more baggage to go through if you want the ceremony done to you. You can’t just walk in and say, “Baptise! Now!”
In my mind, this mindset just harkens back to the days of tradition, when you had to sacrifice and do this sacrifice in a certain way. Purification by blood, etc. As far as my opinion and knowledge goes, this is no longer a strict requirement. It’s more of a “If you love me, you’ll do this.” I think this is just a smidgen’s worth away from “Do it or fall!”
