A sincere student wants to know how one can read Romans 10:9-10, which mentions only faith and confession, and then contend that baptism is essential to salvation. Wayne Jackson discusses the “analogy of faith” principle.

Are we baptized in the Spirit or in water?

Does the fact that God did not require water baptism for the remission of sins under the Mosaic system indicate that baptism must not be obligatory under the New Covenant? Does this compromise the Lord’s “immutability”? Study the question with us.

How old should a child be before he is allowed to be baptized? Are we immersing some who are too young? What are some of the guidelines by which responsible decisions can be made?

The Bible denies that man is saved by works of human merit. But what about “works of God.” Study this commonly misunderstood issue with us.

Some allege that some 3,000 people could not have been immersed on the day of Pentecost because: (a) There was not enough time for twelve apostles to accomplish that feat; (b) There was not enough water in Jerusalem to accommodate such a great multitude.

Many have been deceived into believing that grace by definition excludes obedience. Nothing could be further from the truth.

Does baptism come before or after the salvation contemplated in 1 Peter 3:21?

Another argument which denies the essential role baptism plays in our salvation is answered.

Did the apostle Paul teach that baptism was not necessary for salvation from sins? By no means. Study this passage with us.

Was Cornelius, the Roman centurion, saved before and without baptism? Some so claim.

One dirty little trick used to confuse sincere people about the purpose of baptism.

All loving parents want their children to be saved. But is infant baptism helping our children reach that goal? Or is it a dangerous and unscriptural practice that should be abandoned?

A Roman Catholic gentleman suggests that Ezekiel 36:25 contains a prophecy of sprinkling as an acceptable mode of baptism. What is the biblical response to this assertion?

In the July issue of the well-known protestant journal, Christianity Today, Dr. Timothy George responds to a question regarding the relationship of baptism to salvation. Wayne Jackson comments on this intriguing essay.

A recent news item highlighted a case where an inmate was refused the privilege of being immersed for the remission of his sins. A chorus of sectarian voices argued that “hard cases” like this negate the belief that baptism is a necessary condition for salvation. Is this quibble valid?

The denominational community has long assaulted Mark 16:16 due to the simplicity of the passage in including baptism as a preliminary condition of salvation. Now, such attacks are coming even from certain “change agents” within the body of Christ. This article highlights one such recent effort.

It has long been known that denominationalists, welded to the theory of salvation by “faith alone,” repudiate the connection between baptism and the forgiveness of sins. Some, formally sound on this issue, now are capitulating to sectarian error. Take a brief look at this issue with us.

A sincere Bible student feels that the Greek translation of the Old Testament, the Septuagint, provides evidence that the Greek term bapto may signify the actions of either sprinkling or pouring, as a baptismal rite. What does the evidence actually reveal?

In Acts 2:38 Peter contended that baptism is “for” (eis) the remission of sins. Since many religionists deny this biblical truth, they seek comfort in a supposed parallel that they imagine nullifies the force of eis in Acts 2:38. Some imagine they have found a solution to their theological problem in Matthew 12:41. But have they?