Is Water Baptism 'Because Of' or 'For the Remission of Sins?' - Acts 2:38

There are some who try and teach that "for the remission of sins" in Acts 2:38 actually means "because of the remission of sins already past." This would imply that baptism is not literally for the remission of sins but that we are baptized because of the remission of sins that already took place when we first believed in Jesus. In this video we will use the Word of God to rebuke that thought and to show that "for the remission of sins" literally means that water baptism in the name of Jesus Christ is where our sins are remitted and washed away.

[robertnieten]

Water baptism in the name of Jesus Christ remits our sins, because of the shed blood of Christ, by the Holy Spirit circumcising our conscience and removing the guilt from past sins and restoring it to its original childlike sensitivity to sin. This is the washing of regeneration. The definition of regeneration in the original Greek is to restore something to its original state.
When the Lord told the people that they must become as little children to enter the kingdom of heaven we find that the only way we can is to spiritually become as little children as the result of spiritual circumcision.
Water baptism is also the type of the O.T. antitype of cleansing the temple in preparation for the entry of the Spirit of God.
Spirit baptism is the entry of the Holy Spirit into the cleansed temple.

[_JellyDonut_]

The Greek word "eis" conveys the idea of moving "into" something. It's not really about whether it's a past or future event, at least not according to my understanding. If I say I bought gas "for" my car (past) I mean that the gas goes in the car, not that I bought gas on behalf of my car. I can also say I'm planning to buy gas (future) and the meaning doesn't change. With that in mind Acts 2:38 seems to be saying repent and be baptized in the name of Jesus "into" the remission of sins. Unfortunately this doesn't seem to settle the question of whether eis means "in order to receive" or "as a result of" since into can be interpreted either way in this instance. Either we are baptized into forgiveness of sin meaning that we receive it upon being water baptized; or we are baptized into forgiveness meaning that we become partakers in Christ when we repent (because of his death, burial, and resurrection) and baptism is a symbol that demonstrates the transformation we have undergone.

Either way, we are commanded to be baptized so every Christian definitely should be but based on other passages it seems there are multiple instances in scripture where someone received salvation before/without being baptized. Some examples of this are the thief on the cross, Cornelius and his group (who received the Holy Spirit as Peter was speaking, before they were baptized), and Paul who received the Holy Spirit when Ananias laid hands on him and restored his sight. If a person could only receive salvation by being baptized (specifically "for the remission of sins") how then could Christ have told the thief "today you will be with me in paradise" since he was about to die and wouldn't have the opportunity to be baptized?

There are also some practical issues that arise if we believe a person cannot be saved without being baptized. If someone is in a perilous situation (on a hijacked plane that will crash, sentenced to death in jail, dying in a hospital bed, etc) it would be impossible for them to be forgiven and saved. Are we to believe that no one in the last 2000 years has been saved just moments before their death? When asked this question in debates I've watch the person defending baptismal regeneration usually says something like "God doesn't allow situations like this to happen" but personally I find that answer to be inadequate. I try to keep an open mind but i just feel like baptismal regeneration is essentially salvation by works.

[truth.betold.]

How would you explain 1 Peter 3:20-21?
“who formerly were disobedient, when once the Divine longsuffering waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was being prepared, in which a few, that is, eight souls, were saved through water. “There is also an ANTITYPE which now saves us—baptism (NOT the removal of the FILTH OF FLESH, BUT the answer of a good conscience toward God), through the resurrection of Jesus Christ, ”

This scripture also mentioned the “filth of flesh”.. doesn’t this mean sins? Using II Corinthians 7:1 as a cross reference

[BythiosBythosBrahma]

That's why you must say his name fully Jesus Christo or Jesus Christ

[blakelwhitney]

have you heard the reason people say "for the remission of sins" means "in light of the remission of sins"? is because the Greek word eis often doesn't mean "in order to accomplish/receive/do" like acts 2:38 possibly suggests. of the many times it doesn't mean this one has to study and determine when it should be translated one way and not another. just curious if you've studied the Greek version add where it's used in other ways. I just came across this in my studies.

[approvedofGod]

It is the baptism of "repentance" for the remission of sins!

[islandofpatmos]

Why Do you not Shed the blood of Animals for The Remissions of sin?