0:00 I need to report to you that Allen Parr of the Beat by Allen Parr on YouTube has IBS responding to him about his video on baptism. Let's talk about it. I'm starting a little later in the video. The first thing he does is play scripture words in the first part of this video and say, "You know, baptism doesn't save cuz there's all these verses on belief." I've covered that a million times on this channel. Let's get into the more interesting part, the craziest statements in this video. Check this out. Is the word baptized in the New Testament can mean and refer to different things. Sometimes certain words are used in different ways. So, if I said calculus and you're a math teacher, you would know that that is a a subject that you have to take uh in college or in high school. But if you're a dentist, you would be thinking of calculus as uh something that's on your teeth or whatnot. So, different words are used in different ways depending upon the context. New Testament scholar
0:46 James Montgomery Boice says this concerning the use of the word baptized or I love it you're quoting scholars, let's see. baptism in the New Testament. Now, this is going to get a little deep, but just stay with me. It's going to make a lot of sense. He says, "When used in the New Testament, this word more often refers to our union and identification with Christ than to our water baptism." Well, let me guess, James Montgomery Boice some kind of reformed Calvinist. James Montgomery Boice was an American reformed Christian theologian. But hey, I mean, maybe he's right. Let's see. Let me give you an example of where the word baptized does not refer to water baptism. Notice it says here in 1 Corinthians chapter 10 verse 2. People do this a lot of the time by the way. I've done some videos in Romans 6. People say that's not water baptism, it is. 1 Peter chapter 3, people say that's not water baptism, it
1:31 is. Let's see what he says about 1 Corinthians 10 here. For I do not want you to be ignorant of the fact, brothers and sisters, that our ancestors were all under the cloud and that they all passed through the sea. Now, Paul is referencing uh the Israelites, the nation of Israel in the Old Testament, whenever they were in the wilderness and Moses was leading them in the wilderness out of Egypt into the promised land. And notice what he says, "They were all baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea." Now, is this saying that they actually went through water baptism in the wilderness or does it refer to them identifying with Moses as their leader, placing their faith in Moses who was God's deliverer to deliver them out of Egyptian bondage? False dichotomy. Is that referring to them being baptized or is that referring to them identifying with Moses? Yes is the answer to that
2:17 question. He's going to argue that this is not an instance of a baptism. It is talking more about their union and their association and their faith and their connection with Moses and not water baptism. Now, Dr. Thomas Constable, a Dallas Theological Seminary professor, com- which is there this morning. Comments on this verse and says this, "Baptism is the outward expression of the believer's identification with the object of his or her faith." Cross-reference Romans 6:3, Galatians 3:27. Consequently, Paul could say the Israelites were {quote} baptized into Moses even though they did not undergo literal water baptism in the name of Moses. By following him and submitting to his authority, they expressed their identification with him. So, look at that. Paul could say the Israelites were
3:03 baptized into Moses even though they did not undergo literal water baptism. Then why would Paul include these details of them being under the cloud, in the sea, being baptized immersed into Moses? Why would he specifically identify the fact that water was all around them, which is immersion language? Why would he do that if he wasn't really talking about a baptism? He was just talking about their decision to follow Moses. He could have used that about any other instance, but he used it about the water because typologically this is going to refer to New Testament water baptism. 1 Corinthians 10, to use this to try to undermine baptism saving is literally hilarious. It's literally hilarious. Submitting to his authority, they expressed their identification with him.
3:51 So, my friend, the word baptized, depending upon the context, does not always refer to a literal water baptism. In many contexts, it refers simply to us identifying or associating ourselves with the object of our faith. And I believe that is what Acts chapter 2 verse 38 is saying. He's saying, "Hey, whoa, never go to Acts 2:38. Okay, so again, deeply wrong about the about the argument he just made when it comes to 1 Corinthians 10, that is absolute nonsense. Now, again, the baptism into Moses, was that a baptism into the New Testament like was that New Testament water baptism? No, of course it wasn't. However, typologically this refers to the baptism that we have today. That's why Paul would use this language. This is how happy you could be too, by the way, if you had IBS. And if you had IBS
4:37 on Patreon because for as little as $5 a month you could support the channel on Patreon and get the extended version of this in every video that I do in the other bridges as well. Love you. So, to say that that just like nullifies verses on baptism and now Acts 2 is going to be this identification idea, I can't wait to see this. up our faith. And I believe that is what Acts chapter 2 verse 38 is saying. He's saying, "Hey, repent and be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. Identify your union in Jesus Christ is what leads to the remission or the forgiveness of your sins." See, your union in Christ. He's saying that water baptism is just a union with Christ in Acts 2:38. How does anyone make that argument from the context? Then those who gladly received his word were baptized. Again, this is a literal baptism that is being referred to. 3,000
5:23 souls were added to them. There's a number here that's given. What basis do you have in the context in the context of Acts 2 to say this is not water baptism, especially when you look at the book of Acts itself, you see other baptisms occur that are clearly water baptism. On what basis can you even say this is just his identification, their their identification with Peter and with Jesus? When on what basis can you truly say that from the context other than your presupposition? Now, this third one is going to get a little deep, so I'm just warning you. The third reason is that the Greek construction of this verse is very clear that it is not referring to you having to do something or be baptized for or to receive the forgiveness of your sins. Okay, cuz the argument from Acts 2:38 is Peter's argument, which is repent be baptized
6:09 every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, right? You get baptized, you get the remission of sins. That's what Peter said. That's the way the Greek works. That's what eis means here. I can't wait to hear how he accurately represents what eis is in the Greek. Once again, it's going to get a little deep, but we're going to do a little bit a little lesson here in Greek. In Greek, they have a couple of different prepositions that they could use. The first preposition is the preposition hina or h i n a. And that is typically used whenever an author wants to suggest the word that or in order that. So, uh if they used hina here, it would say repent and be baptized in order to receive the for- for- forgiveness or remission of your sins. But that is not the preposition that is used here. The preposition that is used here in the Greek is the preposition eis or e i s. And this word is more
6:57 translated for uh or in reference to. Now, you may say, "Wait a second, it still sounds like you have to be baptized for the remission of your sins." But let me give you some Yes, that's exactly the way you should understand that. examples. Let's say I said that a child Oh, see, now he's going to go to analogies. Now, he's not going to go to biblical texts. >> [laughter] >> Now, he's instantly going to an analogy to nullify the actual usage of that Greek preposition. is being punished for their disobedience. That is easily understood as the child is being punished as a result of or because of their disobedience, not the fact that their punishment leads them to be disobedient. Okay, but then the question is, buddy, what does the context you dictate for that the usage of that word? And is there even a because of way to use that preposition eis? That's the
7:43 question. Let's see if he addresses that. Can you use eis in a because of sense biblically? Who holds that view? All right, let me give you another example. Let's say I said that a woman is being praised for her beauty. The she's not being praised as a result of her praise that makes her beautiful. No, she is being praised as a result of or because she is beautiful. And so, in the same way at that. He's saying eis means because of. Let's see how he substantiates that. He said it's going to get deep, right? Let's see what scholars he cites. Here, it could easily be interpreted as repent and be baptized not to receive or not for or to receive the forgiveness of your sins, but because [laughter] of the forgiveness of your sins, therefore you should be baptized as a natural byproduct of your salvation. All right, let's hear some scholars, buddy. So, here's the last thing I'll say on this. BAPTISM COME ON!
8:28 NO SCHOLARS, no evidence. This is He quotes one guy earlier who gives a bad quote about what baptism is, not at all what the Bible teaches, and then he goes, "We're going to get a little bit deep here, and I'm going to break down this Greek word to you." He tells you the Greek word. He gives you a basic definition of it, which is correct, and then he goes, "But let me explain to you what that definition should mean instead. It's not for really for. In my analogy, a woman is praised for her beauty. A child is punished for their disobedience. That's really what for means there." No lexicon, no serious grammarians, nothing like that. He just goes, "Yeah, that means for, that's the definition, and think about my analogy. This is what I mean." And then he changes it to mean because of. Now, J.R. Mantey was a guy who tried to do this, the causal use of eis. And I've done some videos about this in the past. I'll link them in the description below. He
9:14 tries to come out with this idea, instantly gets destroyed by Ralph Marcus, and today no serious grammarian out there. I'm very curious to hear if there's someone out there. No serious grammarian holds this view. In fact, some of the most respected guys out there like Daniel B. Wallace are like, "Dude, don't believe that. You shouldn't believe that. That's nonsense. Eis doesn't mean becau- because of in any context at all." The idea that in Acts 2:38 here, that's a big statement by me, right? Easy to falsify. In the name [snorts] of Jesus Christ for, that's eis, the remission of sins. Is it because your sins have already been forgiven? No serious grammarian is making that argument today. None of them. It's only guys on YouTube. It's only guys who are making videos who have an axe to grind, who have a bias against
10:02 what the Bible says on baptism. I'll say it. Maybe that sounds rude, mean, whatever. I don't care. That There's That's not based on any evidence at all. Give me the evidence. I'd love to hear it. And don't you dare try to say they repented at the preaching of Jonah. That doesn't establish because of either. And And again, I have videos on this. I'll link them in the description below. This last part is one of the worst things I've ever heard somebody say about baptism. I promise you I'm not exaggerating. is a command, but it is not a requirement for salvation. In other words, if you are living your life and if you never been baptized, you're living in disobedience, particularly if you had an opportunity to be baptized, because anytime Jesus gives us a clear command in scripture that we need to do something, if we don't do it, we're living in disobedience. But my point here is this, there's a lot of clear commands that Jesus gave us that we
10:47 oftentimes do not fulfill. An example of that would be Jesus clearly said that we should make disciples. There are some Christians that will go their entire Christian life and never make one disciple. But does that mean that because they have disobeyed that one command from Christ that they're not going to go to heaven? Jesus also said that we should forgive our brothers and sisters or our enemies 70 * 7. But there are some people that go through their entire life with bitterness and anger, resentment, and unforgiveness, and they never apply that command to forgive. Does that mean that that person does not go to heaven? No, it just means that they're living in disobedience. So in the same way, even though the Bible is clear that baptism is a command from God, you can still go to heaven if you, for whatever reason, fail to be baptized as long as you place your faith in Jesus
11:32 Christ. However, please understand that if you don't get baptized, you are living in complete and total disobedience to the clear command of Jesus Christ. >> There are some people who spend their entire life cheating on their wives with multiple women constantly, consistently, unrepentantly. They love to do it. They don't care about what that does to their wife. They don't care about what that does to their children. They don't care about what that does to their family. And they're going to heaven. Don't get me wrong. They're still going to heaven. But it's not good. It's disobedience. There are some people who go on a spree and pull up to random waffle houses and beat up the smallest children in the restaurant. And I mean they really beat them up. They throw them through the window and everything. And they do this all the time. Now, that guy's still going to heaven. Don't get me wrong. However, it's disobedience. There are some people who find old people who need to cross the street and need some help.
12:19 And what they do is they grab those people and they push them as hard as they can. Now, these people, they're still going to heaven, but they're living in disobedience. And you've got to know that. The same thing is with baptism. This is craziness, isn't it? This is absolute insanity. Is Allen Parr a free grace guy? He must be a free grace guy to say something crazy like that. Look at that. You can really, if you want to get baptized, get baptized. If you don't want to, you're living in disobedience, but you're still going to heaven. It's all right. It's not that big of a deal. Right? You should do it. And Jesus commands you to do it. In fact, there are warnings against you not doing it, right? Just like with forgiveness. If you don't forgive, is Isn't it so interesting? Jesus says, "For if you forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you." Look at the condition. "But if you do not forgive men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses." I wish
13:06 Jesus could have had some time to sit down and watch Alan Parr's video here, because there are things that God commands, right? But you're still going to go to heaven, right? Let's not be crazy here. Yes, God commands it. And if you don't do it, you're living in disobedience, but there isn't a consequence to the disobedience. You're still going to go to heaven as long as you put your faith in Christ. What unbiblical hogwash. What unbiblical nonsense. What a crazy thing to say. Bad, bad, bad arguments all around. Maybe I'll do another follow-up video on the first part of this video. Absolutely insane stuff by Alan Parr. He's got over a million subscribers though. He'll never talk to me. I wish that he would though. Alan Parr, if you're out there, if this video somehow gets to you, let's try to get this video to Alan Parr. Please, let's talk about it. That is the craziest thing I've heard someone say in
13:52 a long time. And I watch needtoknow.net's videos. This is absolutely insane. I'm very curious to hear what you have to say. Am I wrong about this? Let me know what you think. Like the video, subscribe to the channel, consider supporting on Patreon. For as little as $5 a month, you can support the channel, get the extended version of this and every video that I do and other preachers well. I love you so much. If you're watching this tonight, I have a dialogue on the Cleave to Antiquity channel on infant baptism with Cleave and Father Ron, a priest there, an Eastern Orthodox priest. Very excited for that conversation. Tune in to that 8:00 p.m. Eastern tonight if you're watching on Thursday. If not, it's already archived on that channel on the live tab. Let me know what you think. Very curious to hear what you have to say. Lord willing, I'll talk to you soon. Take care. Goodbye. >> [music] [music]
