Baptism
Peter Taught Baptism
by Owen Olbricht
“And Peter said to them, ‘Repent, and let each of
you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the
forgiveness of your sins; and you shall receive the gift of
the Holy Spirit’” (Acts 2:38).
Peter was brought to Jesus by his brother,
Andrew (John 1:40, 41). As a disciple of John (John
1:35), Andrew had been baptized with the prepa-
ratory baptism of repentance for the remission of
sins. He was anxious to bring Peter to meet Jesus
after learning about Him from John (John 1:35-42);
most likely, he had also shared John’s message
with Peter. Peter, then, would have been familiar
with the baptism of repentance for forgiveness of
sins. He may have received the baptism which
John was preaching (Luke 3:3). Followers of Jesus
became disciples through being baptized (John
4:1). Peter most likely was baptized when he be-
came a disciple of Jesus (Luke 6:13, 14).
PETER TAUGHT BAPTISM
Peter stood out prominently among the apostles
and disciples of Jesus. Significantly, his name ap-
pears first in all the lists of the apostles (Matthew
10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Even though,
after the resurrection and ascension of Jesus, he
immediately took the lead among the followers of
Jesus (Acts 1:15; 2:14, 37), this fact does not mean
that Peter had more authority than the rest of the
apostles. It simply means that Jesus gave him a
leadership role in the beginning days of the church.
Jesus said that what he and the other apostles
would bind and loose “shall be bound” and “shall
be loosed in heaven” (Matthew 16:19; 18:18). The
NASB faithfully represents the Greek perfect pas-
sive participle in these verses, indicating that the
apostles would not be binding and loosing on their
own, but would be binding and loosing what al-
ready had been bound and loosed in heaven.
When Jesus, after His death, burial, and resur-
rection, sent the apostles into all the world to
preach the gospel, Peter was present and heard
Jesus say that all authority had been given to Him
in heaven and on earth. Jesus told them,
All authority has been given to me in heaven
and on earth. Go therefore and make disciples
of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of
the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit
(Matthew 28:18, 19).
He who has believed and has been baptized
shall be saved; but he who has disbelieved
shall be condemned (Mark 16:15).
And that repentance for forgiveness of sins
should be proclaimed in His name to all the
nations, beginning from Jerusalem (Luke 24:47).
Along with the other apostles, Peter waited in
Jerusalem for the promise of the Holy Spirit (Luke
24:49; Acts 1:4-8), who would help them remember
all that Jesus had said (John 14:26) and guide them
into all truth (John 16:13). They were to begin their
witness for Jesus in Jerusalem and then take the
gospel into the rest of the world (Acts 1:8). Being
prepared in this way, Peter (and the other apostles)
could accurately reveal the teaching of Jesus to
others.
In Jerusalem
On the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1), in Jerusa-
lem (Acts 2:5), Peter preached forgiveness of sins
1
in the name of Jesus Christ for the first time in the
history of the world (Luke 24:47). This gospel would
later be preached to the rest of the world (Acts 1:8).
Peter had understood the statement Jesus made
concerning His having all power in heaven and on
earth (Matthew 28:18) to mean that He would
immediately ascend to power at the right hand of
God (Acts 2:33; 1 Peter 3:22), where He would
begin His role as Lord and Christ (Acts 2:36). In his
first sermon Peter sought to convince his Jewish
listeners of these facts and to place on them the
guilt of crucifying their Messiah (Acts 2:33-36). He
concluded by saying that Jesus is Lord and Christ.
This pronouncement cut deep into their hearts,
an indication that they believed Peter’s statement
that Jesus is both Lord and Christ. Believing in
Jesus as Lord and Messiah means seeking forgive-
ness in His name (Acts 4:12) through His blood
(Hebrews 10:19, 20) and submitting to Him as
master and king (Luke 6:46).
The New Way
Peter offered this new way of forgiveness by
stating: “Repent, and let each of you be baptized in
the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your
sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy
Spirit” (Acts 2:38). The first edition of the NIV says,
“Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the
name of Jesus Christ so that your sins may be
forgiven. And you will receive the gift of the Holy
Spirit.”
THE FORGIVENESS OF SINS
Some have taught that baptism is not a prereq-
uisite of salvation, and others have asserted that it
is not necessary to understand that one’s sins are
being forgiven when he is being baptized. The
former view is taken because of a theology that
salvation is by faith only. The latter is based on the
theology that if one is being baptized so that his
sins will be forgiven, he is trying to obey a promise
rather than a command.1 For this reason, it is taught
that one does not need to understand his sins are
being forgiven when he is baptized.
If one tried to wash away his sins with water
the same way he washes dirt from his body, then
he would be seeking to make baptism a work to
remove his sins—a kind of work the Bible teaches
will not save (Ephesians 2:8). On the other hand, if
he submits to baptism because of his faith in Jesus’
1
Rubel Shelly, I Just Want to Be a Christian (Nashville:
20th Century Christian, 1986), 120-27; Jimmy Allen, Re-
baptism? (Monroe, La.: Howard Publishing Co., 1991), 41,
48, 155, 206, 210, 211.
2
blood to wash away his sins, 2 then his baptism is
not a work of righteousness (Titus 3:5), but rather
an act of faith in the work of God, who raised Jesus
from the dead (Colossians 2:12). Baptism from this
standpoint is not a work of man that removes his
sins, but rather a response based on faith in the
cleansing power of the blood of Jesus to remove his
sins.
FORGIVENESS IN JESUS’ NAME
The faith in Jesus brought about by Peter’s
preaching motivated people to ask the question,
“What shall we do?” Peter told them what to do.
Receiving his word (Acts 2:41) meant that they
would accept Jesus as the Messiah, amend their
ways, and be baptized in Jesus’ name for the for-
giveness of sins.
Peter’s telling them to “repent” meant that
they were to realize their sins were their problem,
and “be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the
forgiveness of your sins” meant that they were to
realize that cleansing came from Jesus for those
who repented and were baptized. No one men-
tioned in the New Testament who subsequently
repented and was baptized is shown to have un-
derstood differently than these first converts to
Jesus. What was preached to them was to be
preached to all successive hearers (Luke 24:47),
which means that the same requirements for for-
giveness would be preached wherever this mes-
sage was taken.
Both repentance and baptism were for “the
forgiveness of sins.” Peter did not say, “Repent so
that your sins can be forgiven and be baptized
because your sins are already forgiven.” “For the
forgiveness of sins” is equally related to “repent”
and to “be baptized.” The same purpose associ-
ated with repentance is also associated with bap-
tism. If they were to repent so that their sins could
be forgiven, they were to be baptized so that their
sins could be forgiven. If they were to be baptized
because their sins were already forgiven, then they
were to repent because their sins were already
forgiven. The conjunction “and” equally joins “re-
pent” and “be baptized” to the purpose “forgive-
ness of sins.” They could not repent for one pur-
pose and be baptized for another purpose; both
repentance and baptism were to be for the same
purpose.
Newman and Nida wrote that the phrase “so
that your sins will be forgiven” (literally “into a
2
This is according to the fourth principle in the discus-
sion of principles governing response to the will of God in
lessons 2 and 3.
forgiveness of your sins”) “modifies both main
verbs; turn away from your sins and be baptized.”3
The word “for” in the phrase “for the forgive-
ness of sins” is the Greek word eis, which has the
primary meaning of into. The weight of scholar-
ship rightfully supports eis in this passage as mean-
ing “with a view to, or resulting in—i.e., final or
consecutive.”4
Oepke listed eis (Acts 2:38) under the heading
“Consecutive and final eis.” He stated, “The prepo-
sition denotes the direction of an action to a spe-
cific end.” Later he added, “The final force of eis is
increased to the degree that the associated prepo-
sitional expression becomes an independent ad-
verbial definition.” Along with other examples of
this he presents, ”John baptizes, and Jesus sheds
His blood for the forgiveness of sins (Mk. 1:4; Lk.
3:3; Matt. 26:28; cf. Ac. 2:38).” 5
Thayer placed eis associated with baptism un-
der the heading “the end which a thing is adapted
to attain.”6 His lexicon refers the reader to the
article on baptism, where Acts 2:38 is translated,
“. . . to obtain the forgiveness of sins.” 7
Bauer, Gingrich, and Danker listed eis in Acts
2:38 under the heading “to denote the goal” and
the subheading “to denote purpose in order to.”
They then translated the phrase as used here and in
other passages, “for the forgiveness of sins, so that
sins might be forgiven Mt 26:28; cf. Mk 1:4; Lk 3:3;
Ac 2:38.”8
The phrase “for forgiveness of sins” in Mat-
thew 26:28 is the same phrase which relates to
baptism (Mark 1:4; Luke 3:3; Acts 2:38). If Jesus
died “for” (eis), in order to obtain, forgiveness of sins
for us, then we are to be baptized “for” (eis), in order
to obtain, the forgiveness He has provided for us,
for the phrase “for the forgiveness of sins” in-
cludes the same Greek words in these passages.
However, if eis in this phrase means because, then
not only are we to be baptized because our sins are
3
Barkley M. Newman and Eugene A. Nida, A Trans-
lator’s Handbook on the Acts of the Apostles (New York:
United Bible Societies, 1972), 60.
4
C. F. D. Moule, An Idiom-Book of New Testament Greek,
2d ed. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1953), 70.
5
A. Oepke, “eis,” in Theological Dictionary of the New
Testament, ed. Gerhard Kittel, trans. and ed. Geoffrey W.
Bromiley (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Wm. B. Eerdmans Pub-
lishing Co., 1976), 2:429.
6
Joseph Henry Thayer, A Greek-English Lexicon of the
New Testament (New York: American Book Co., 1973), 185.
7
Ibid., 94.
8
Walter Bauer, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New
Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, 2d ed., rev.
William F. Arndt, F. Wilbur Gingrich, and Frederick W.
Danker, (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1979), 229.
already forgiven but Jesus shed His blood because
our sins were already forgiven. This interpretation
would make His death a senseless shedding of
blood, as empty a ritual as is baptism if sins are
already forgiven before the act. Since Jesus died for
a reason, this usage of eis must express intent and
purpose.
Jesus consciously, knowingly, and intention-
ally died “for” (eis) the forgiveness of sins. He
knew and understood He was shedding His blood
“for” (eis) the forgiveness of our sins; therefore, if
we are baptized “for” (eis) the forgiveness of sins,
we also must know and understand the purpose
for which we are being baptized. If eis means Jesus
was shedding His blood for a known purpose, then
it follows that we are to be baptized for a known
purpose. Who will contend that eis in Matthew
26:28 does not express the fact that Jesus knew the
purpose for which He was shedding His blood?
Since the same phrase is used relative to baptism,
does it not follow that eis expresses the fact that we
are to know the purpose for which we are being
baptized?
The Jews in Acts 2:5, 37, 38, because of the
instruction Peter had given them, understood the
purpose for which they were to be baptized. As the
first converts under the new covenant, they set a
pattern for all succeeding generations of all na-
tions. If they understood that they were to be
baptized in order to receive forgiveness of sins, then
we must understand the same truth in order to be
forgiven of our sins. An action without the right
intent and purpose is as much disobedience as a
failure to act at all. The one who is being baptized
must know that he is being baptized in order to
receive the forgiveness of sins.
Some have agreed that “for” means “with a
view to” receiving forgiveness of sins, but they
argue that since verbs must agree with their sub-
jects in person and number, and since “repent” is
second person plural and “be baptized” is third
person singular, “repent” and “be baptized” can-
not be combined to modify “for the forgiveness of
sins.” From this they conclude that forgiveness of
sins should be associated with “repent” and not
with “be baptized.”
Even though this may seem to violate a gram-
matical principle in the Greek, ample evidence is
available to show that the usage of a second person
plural along with a third person singular is normal
as a Greek idiom. Instances of the subject and the
verb failing to be in agreement in idiomatic usages
appear in John 9:3; Luke 8:30; Matthew 6:19; Mark
4:41; 1 Corinthians 15:50; and James 5:2, 3. These
3
are not violations of rules in the Greek, but rather
are established idiomatic usages.
Instead of weakening the connection between
baptism and forgiveness of sins, the construction
in Acts 2:38 emphasizes the importance of baptism
in relationship to forgiveness of sins. An article by
Carroll D. Osburn provided examples of such us-
ages of Greek idioms.9 Of special interest is a
quotation from a thesis by J. Glaze in this same
article:
. . . the third person singular imperative does
function idiomatically in concert with a second
person plural imperative so as to allow the
speaker addressing a group to address mem-
bers of that group individually. In this dis-
tributive imperatival usage, the speaker at-
taches such tremendous importance to the com-
mand that he makes it clear with the third
person singular imperative that not a single
member of the group is exempt.10
Examples of this usage are found in Exodus 16:29;
Joshua 6:10; 2 Kings 10:19 and Zechariah 7:10 in the
Septuagint.
Rather than disassociating baptism from for-
giveness of sins, Peter was making more emphatic
the necessity that each one of his hearers receive
baptism so that their sins could be forgiven. Other
explanations that seek to remove the importance
Peter was placing on each of his hearers’ being bap-
tized for the forgiveness of sins do injustice to an
established idiomatic manner of Greek expression.
The command is to “be baptized for the for-
giveness of sins.” The command is not just “be
baptized.” If this had been the command, then one
could be baptized as a matter of obedience to God
for any reason, and in so doing completely obey
God’s command. However, the command is not
simply to “be baptized.” When a sinner comes to
be baptized, “forgiveness of sins” is to be his goal.
He is to recognize his lost condition, accept Jesus
as the Messiah, have faith in His cleansing blood,
and resolve to change his life in obedience to His
will.
Peter had been conditioned for this by the
message preached by John (Matthew 3:2) and Jesus
(Matthew 4:17), and by the apostles’ message to
change sinful lives because the kingdom of heaven
was at hand (Matthew 10:2, 7). He also was obey-
ing Jesus’ command to preach the gospel and bap-
tize those who would believe (Matthew 28:19; Mark
9 12
Carroll D. Osburn, “The Third Person Imperative in
Acts 2:38,” Restoration Quarterly 26 (Second Quarter 1983):
81-84.
10
Ibid., 83.
4
16:15, 16).
1 PETER 3:21
In a letter Peter wrote later, he corroborated his
statement on the Day of Pentecost, “And corre-
sponding to that, baptism now saves you—not the
removal of dirt from the flesh, but an appeal to God
for a good conscience—through the resurrection of
Jesus Christ” (1 Peter 3:21).
Concerning this verse Robert G. Bratcher wrote,
. . . this translates what is literally “which
baptism, as an antitype.” An “antitype” is a
thing or event which is considered to be re-
ferred to by a previous thing or event, which is
known as a “type.” The water of the Flood was
a “type” of baptism.
. . . now saves you: this now answers to the
formerly of verse 20. A translation should rep-
resent the meaning faithfully and say quite
clearly “Baptism now saves you.” Of course
salvation is always God’s action, but here bap-
tism, as defined below is what brings salvation.
At once the writer defines what he means by
baptism saving someone: it is not a physical act
of washing dirt off the body, but the spiritual
experience of the inner self. 11
Arichea and Nida stated concerning 1 Peter
3:20, 21,
The “type” foreshadows the “antitype,” that
is, it is an imperfect symbol of a reality which is
now revealed fully in the Christian faith.
At any rate, it is this “antitype,” whatever it
is, which now saves them.
The text as it stands makes baptism (or the
water of baptism) as the agent that saves. A
careful reading of the whole verse, however,
indicates that which now saves you should per-
haps go with through the resurrection of Jesus
Christ at the end of the verse (compare 1:3). 12
After other considerations, they suggested that in
translating the verse, “It may be better to combine
the last clause of verse 21 with the expression which
now saves you, for example, by means of being
baptized, God now saves you through Jesus Christ’s
being raised from the dead.” 13
This statement by Peter is consistent with his
statement in Acts 2:38. The faith in God that moved
Noah to build the ark, because of impending doom
(Hebrews 11:7) is the same kind of faith that moves
a lost person, motivated by his conscience, to seek
salvation through being baptized in the name of
11
Robert G. Bratcher, A Translator’s Guide to the Letters
From James, Peter, and Jude (London: United Bible Societies,
1984), 109.
Daniel C. Arichea and Eugene A. Nida, A Translator’s
Handbook on the First Letter From Peter (New York: United
Bible Societies, 1980), 119-21.
13
Ibid.
Jesus Christ. Baptism is somehow inseparably as-
sociated with the salvation provided by the death
and resurrection of Jesus.
Another consideration in 1 Peter 3:21 is the
expression “an appeal to God for a good con-
science,” better translated, “the appeal to God of a
good conscience.”14 Regardless of which transla-
tion is correct, the conscience is involved in the
appeal. If one does not understand that for which
he is appealing, how can he make his appeal? Most
reasonably the appeal is made to God for salvation
by a sinner who has a good conscience, a con-
science like that of the persecutor Saul (1 Timothy
1:13), even before he became a Christian (Acts
23:1). A corrupted conscience would not motivate
a person to make such an appeal.
The appeal for salvation from sin does not
mean that one is seeking to forgive his own sins by
obeying a command. It means that his conscience
has moved him to be baptized for the forgiveness
of his sins, appealing to God for salvation. Only
those who understand the proper connection be-
14
Hugo McCord, New Testament (Henderson, Tenn.:
Freed-Hardeman College, 1988).
©Copyright, 1994-1998 by Truth for Today
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
tween baptism and the forgiveness of sins can
make such an appeal.
Peter considered baptism a necessary response
of faith in order to receive the benefit of Jesus’ act
of redemption. No wonder Peter commanded his
hearers to be baptized (Acts 10:48; cf. 2:38).
CONCLUSION
Peter was trained and selected by Jesus to be
the first to preach salvation in His name. In Jeru-
salem he helped those in his first audience to
realize they were lost. They came to believe in
Jesus and inquired what to do. Peter told them to
make the necessary changes in their lives so they
could follow Jesus. Those who gladly received his
words were baptized, evidently with the under-
standing that their sins would be forgiven when
they repented and were baptized in Jesus’ name
(Acts 2:38-41). This message was not only for the
Jews whom Peter taught on that great Day of
Pentecost, but is also for the rest of the world
(Luke 24:47).