Image source: http://68.media.tumblr.com/e94478dc13be6422ab6e997b26930a4a/tumblr_mhar8hgj9g1r1ibwko1_r1_1280.png
One also has to ask a different question if one is to interpret 1 Cor. 1:17 as teaching that baptism does now not matter to Paul or to Christ. Actually, two questions. (1) Why was Paul, an apostle, exempt from the command Jesus gave to the other apostles just before his ascension to heaven in Matt. 28:19-20 where the command was, "Go therefore and make disciples of all of the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you constantly, even to the end of the age"? (NKJV) Is he various form of special apostle who was exempted from this command to baptize? Did the disciples made by Peter, John, and the other apostles have to be baptized but now not those made by Paul? I hope you do now not agree with that. What Peter, John, and the other apostles were commanded to do Paul was also commanded to do in any other case he was now not required to satisfy the Great Commission as they were and who believes that?
According to the Acts 18 account the Lord spoke to Paul telling him he had many folks in Corinth (verse 10) and directing Paul to now not hold his peace but to communicate up in preaching the gospel (verse 9). Paul spent 18 months in Corinth preaching (verse 11).
For preaching a piece different than what you are use to hearing try the audio sermons of Waymon Swain.
Paul most evidently did now not mean that Christ sent him out into the world to preach that baptism was a non-essential and that none ought to be baptized for it was Jesus himself who said, "he who believes and is baptized will be saved" (Mark 16:16 NKJV) and that "unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God" (John 3:5 NKJV) and it was Paul who was commanded to "arise and be baptized" to have his sins washed away (Acts 22:16 NKJV). One can also read the passages Paul wrote almost approximately baptism listed but now not discussed earlier in this article (Rom. 6:1-7, Gal. 3:26-27, Eph. 5:25-26, Col. 2:11-12, Titus 3:5) to see Paul's teaching on the subject and the importance he placed on it.
Sometimes it's straightforward to misunderstand passages of scripture and especially so if we have gotten all sorts of help doing so. Paul's statement in 1 Cor. 1:17 is such a passage. It reads as follows: "For Christ did now not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel." (1 Cor. 1:17a NKJV) What is Paul saying here? Is he saying that Christ does now not care whether or now not disciples are baptized? Is he saying it's unimportant and makes no difference to one's salvation whether he/she is baptized? It is the goal of this article to reveal the folly of taking that form of stance founded on this scripture.
Let me start out by asking a question that ought to be answered if one is to take the place that baptism does now not matter and that Paul was teaching that in this passage. Here is the question, if it did now not matter, if it has nothing to do with salvation, if Christ did now not desire Paul to baptize why did Paul baptize? He says in verses 14 and 16 that he baptized Crispus and Gaius and the household of Stephanas. In Acts 19:1-7 Paul came to Ephesus and discovered 12 men there that had now not been baptized appropriately and he baptized them. Why? Why if Paul felt it was unnecessary? One also finds others who were baptized either by Paul or by a companion of his due to Paul's teaching on the subject - Lydia and her household (Acts 16:14-15) and the Philippian jailer and his family (Acts 16:29-33).
If baptism does now not matter and Paul did now not care whether folks were baptized or now not then why was Paul baptized? Was more required of Paul than any one else in becoming a Christian? The command to Paul by Ananias, a guy sent at as soon as by the Lord himself (see Acts 9:10-16) to Paul (at that time recognised as Saul), was "arise and be baptized, and wash away your sins." (Acts 22:16 NKJV)
Paul in 1 Corinthians was writing to the church that he validated there. He says of it "I planted" (1 Cor. 3:6 NKJV); "I have laid the foundation" (1 Cor. 3:10 NKJV); "For though you may have ten thousand instructors in Christ, yet you do now not have many fathers; for in Christ Jesus I have begotten you through the gospel" (1 Cor. 4:15 NKJV).
Most this day, if they were to be consistent in what they teach, would have to tell you that Ananias was mistaken and will now not be most likely have meant what he said approximately Paul having sins to be washed away for they say a guy is saved from his sins at the point of religion and thus Paul had no sins to be washed away so they know more approximately it than the man sent at as soon as by the Lord himself to Paul. They also would have to tell you, on the grounds that they agree with man has no section in his personal salvation apart from faith, there was nothing Paul may do to aid himself contrary to what Ananias told him.
(2) Which disciple was it in Matt. 28:18-20 that Jesus said would now not ought to be baptized? I may add the disciples that were made were to be taught "to observe all things I have commanded you" which was what - to go make disciples and baptize them. Matthew 28:19-20 settles the matter of whether baptism is vital to salvation on its personal, no other passage is needed, unless of course one can deliberately disobey Jesus and still be saved. But, there are many, many other passages teaching the same necessity of baptism as essential to salvation.
In 1 Cor. 6:11 Paul, after speaking of sins that will prohibit one from inheriting the kingdom of God (verses 9 and 10), says to the Corinthians, "And such were various of you. But you were washed" (NKJV) Now what form of washing would it be that would make a difference in one's salvation - that would cleanse one? Might it now not well be the same washing Paul had when he was baptized? "Now why are you waiting? Arise and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on the name of the Lord." (Acts 22:16 NKJV) Yes, washing (baptism) makes a difference in that it spiritually speaking washes away sins in obedience to the command of God.
The record of the establishment of the church at Corinth is provide in Acts chapter 18. As a result of Paul's preaching the text says, "And many of the Corinthians, hearing, believed and were baptized." (Acts 18:8 NKJV) Were the converts Paul made left unbaptized on the grounds that Paul thought it was unimportant and did now not teach it? Not consistent with this text. He said in his letter to the church at Corinth he was now not sent to baptize but it's definite he taught it in any other case how did the Corinthians learn approximately it and why were they baptized? If Paul did now not do the exact baptizing (and he did now not do it consistent with 1 Cor. 1:17) then it's definite various of his helpers or assistants did on his behalf.
But, that isn't always all Paul has to say to the Corinthians almost approximately baptism. In 1 Cor. 12:13 he says to them, "For by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body." (1 Cor. 12:13 NKJV) That body, the only body that matters with regards to one's salvation, is the body of Christ of which he (Christ) is the Savior (Eph. 5:23). Now read Paul's words carefully here. He says "we were all baptized into one body." All means every considered one of us, no exceptions. How many disciples did Jesus say may still be baptized back in Matt. 28:19? None were to be exempted, now not a single one. In New Testament times there was no such thing as a Christian who had now not been baptized. That has now not changed with time even if men will have none of it this day and reject it entirely.
Why if Paul felt baptism was unnecessary did he teach baptism in Rom. 6:1-7, 1 Cor. 6:11, 1 Cor. 12:13, Gal. 3:26-27, Eph. 5:25-26, Col. 2:11-12, Titus 3:5, and if Paul wrote Hebrews as many agree with he did in Heb. 10:22?
