Acts 2:38—“Repent and be baptized …”

Now when they heard this, they were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men and brethren, what shall we do?  Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized 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. For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call (Acts 2:37-39).

BAPTIST ARGUMENT:

“Peter said ‘Repent and be baptized’ …. in that order!”

(I)

Rev. Ronald Hanko

(a)

[Source: Sprinkling, Infant Baptism and the Bible]

The Baptist argument [on this text] is based on the assumption that the order in these passages is in fact the order in which these things must take place.  That assumption is not only unproved by the Baptists, but is false.

… [Just] because [repentance] and baptism are listed in that order does not mean that they must necessarily happen in that order.  II Peter 1:10 lists “calling” before “election,” but calling does not come before election, as every Calvinist knows:

Wherefore the rather, brethren, give diligence to make your calling and election sure: for if ye do these things, ye shall never fall.      

The order in [Acts 2:38] is simply the order of importance.  [Repentance] is listed before baptism because it is far more important …

      

Indeed, if the order in [Acts 2:38] is the temporal order, i.e., the order in which things must actually take place, then the order is [repentance], baptism, [receiving the Holy Ghost] … [“Repent and be baptized … and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost”]!  No Baptists, certainly not those who are Calvinists, want that order!  Yet if the order of the passage is the temporal order, then the verse not only puts [repentance] before baptism, but baptism before [receiving the Holy Spirit], and teaches the error of baptismal regeneration.  The Baptist, however, wants arbitrarily to change the rules for interpreting the passage in the middle of the verse.  He wants the relation between [repentance] and baptism to be temporal, but not that between baptism and [regeneration]!

(b)

[Source: Sprinkling, Infant Baptism and the Bible]

Even if repentance had to precede baptism in the case of those who were converted under Peter’s Pentecost preaching, that does not mean that repentance must always precede baptism.  Mark 1:4 and Acts 19:4 show that this is not so.

      

Let us look, first of all, at Mark 1:4, which says:

John did baptize in the wilderness, and preach the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins.

      

On the basis of Acts 2:38, the Baptists conclude that the baptism of repentance is a baptism which is preceded by repentance.

      

This is, however, by no means evident.  While the word “of” could mean “the baptism that has its source or basis in repentance” (and be suggesting that baptism ought to follow repentance), the word “of” might also mean, however, that baptism and repentance simply belong to one another, without saying anything about the order in which they occur.

      

We believe that the phrase says nothing about the order in which the two occur, but rather means that repentance and baptism always belong together—that baptism demands repentance (either prior to, or following, or both). 

      

What is interesting, however, is that other passages which do speak of an order between baptism and repentance teach that baptism is followed by repentance!  Matthew 3:11, a parallel passage to Mark 1:4, makes this clear.  There we read of a baptism “unto” (literally, “into”) repentance, where the word “unto” has the idea of “movement towards something.”  The idea, then, is that baptism is administered with a view to repentance following, or even as a kind of call to repentance.  Matthew 3:11 reads in full:

I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance: but he that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire.

In suggesting that baptism looks forward, and not back to repentance, Matthew 3:11 identifies an important difference between the Baptist and Reformed views of baptism.  The Baptist view is that baptism is a sign or mark of what we have done in repenting and believing.  The Reformed position is that baptism is sign or mark of what God has done in regenerating us.  It does not mark our response to grace, but the work of grace itself and calls us to respond to that work.

      

Baptism, in the very nature of the rite, is a picture of the washing away of sins by the blood of Jesus.  This is what God does in saving us, and He does it first.  He does it when we are yet incapable of responding to His gracious work.  Repentance follows.

      

If we understand this, then infant baptism will not seem something strange, but fitting.  After all, there is not one of us saved—as an adult or as an infant—that does not enter the kingdom of heaven as an infant, that is, by a work of pure grace that precedes all activity and response on our part.  That work of grace is what infant baptism marks and commemorates.

      

Acts 19:4 gives further confirmation of what we have said.  Paul refers to the baptism of John and says that John told the people while he was baptizing them that they should believe on Christ who would come:

Then said Paul, John verily baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying unto the people, that they should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus.

He did not demand faith before baptizing them, but called them to faith while baptizing them.  In that light it is difficult to see that how the baptism of repentance, as John’s baptism is called, could be a baptism in which repentance, but not faith, had to precede the baptism.

      

Furthermore, the fact that repentance does precede baptism in some cases does not prove that it did in all.

(c)

[Source: Sprinkling, Infant Baptism and the Bible]

Following the Baptist line of reasoning, one might just as easily prove from II Corinthians 1:6 that consolation comes before salvation, or from I Corinthians 1:30 that wisdom, righteous and sanctification come before redemption, because they are mentioned first.  In fact, following the Baptist line of reasoning, the order in Mark 16:15-16, is, first of all, faith, then water baptism, then salvation; an order that no Baptist could accept.  All Mark 16:15-16 [and Acts 2:38], proves, then, is that faith, baptism and salvation [or repentance, baptism and receiving the Holy Spirit] are very closely related to each other.

---------------------------------------------

(II)

More to come! (DV)