Notes on Baptism, Part 2

Here's a little more on that correspondence about baptism:

Yes, [John] McArthur gives the standard Reformation answer, of which I agree with about 95%. In principle we are on the same page, i.e. salvation is by grace and you can't do something to earn it. But the interpretation of baptism as ONLY an act of obedience (the meaningless hoop to jump through I referenced before) and not a part of what faith is, is just that, an interpretation. It's not what the Bible actually says, but rather it's a reaction to the wrong-headed teachings of the medieval Catholic church. The Catholic church had been pushing a works-based salvation, essentially turning baptism into a rite that earns God's favor. The Reformation, rightfully, got as far away from that as possible.

But I'm not sure they had to go quite as far as they did. If you're driving off the road, the correct course is to return to your lane, not go off the road on the other side. And perhaps we go too far too often, attempting to over-explain and classify things in simple categories that we may not fully understand. Dogma and specificity in Biblically vague areas always concern me just a little – that anyone can claim to understand how God works to that degree of detail – hmm, I'm not so sure.

As we attempt to figure these things out, we always try to run a self-analysis, asking: What currently shapes my views on theology? Where have I been spiritually and how does that influence me? Am I overly concerned or over-reacting to anything doctrinally? Am I calloused or deafened to anything doctrinally? Each of us have our own challenge to understanding God's truth and many of our differences are small and insignificant. But once in a while we start down a road we shouldn't and it spares us to be as self-aware as possible.