Dispensationalism can be used to argue against this passage that talks about the need to get water baptized to be saved. But Pastor Kim is going to teach how one can do that without getting into dispensationalism arguments.
Mark 16:16 “He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.”
That is a nasty verse showing that water baptism is required for salvation. No, God doesn’t require somebody to get baptized in water for salvation.
1st Argument – Obviously Expected “and”
There is a common argument among independent Baptists that a person who believes in Christ for salvation will obviously be expected to be baptized. For example, one buys a ticket and boards the plane to reach San Francisco, and it is natural and expected for that person to board the plane.
But some Church of Christ debaters argue that that’s not the case, because why would God add “and is baptised” if it is obviously expected? They insist that baptism is expected and also necessary (like it’s necessary to board the plane to reach San Francisco) for salvation.
To argue against that, one can use the word “and”, it means “consequently it was expected”. That’s why, as soon as a person believed in Christ for salvation, they immediately got baptized. We can see this in the examples of the Ethiopian eunuch in Acts 8 and the Philippian jailer in Acts 16.
“And as they went on their way, they came unto a certain water: and the eunuch said, See, here is water; what doth hinder me to be baptized?”
Acts 8:36-37 “And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.”
“And brought them out, and said, Sirs, what must I do to be saved?”
Acts 16:30-31 “And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house.”
Acts 16:33 “And he took them the same hour of the night, and washed their stripes; and was baptized, he and all his, straightway.”
Notice that as soon as the Philippian jailer believed in Christ for salvation, it was expected that he and his family would get baptized, and they did.
2nd Argument – Main Idea: Believing (second part)
The first one is actually the weakest argument. The 2nd argument is looking at the next part of the verse.
Mark 16:16 “He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.”
If it’s expected one has to believe and get baptized for salvation, why didn’t he say “he that believeth not and baptized not shall be damned” in this part of the verse? The author is pointing out that the main idea had nothing to do with baptism, it was believing. The damnation is based on believing. Cults will always quote the verse partially, they are not going to quote you the whole verse.
Third Argument – Main Idea: Repetition
Cults always pick one verse without looking at the whole context. The main idea is based on repetition of the whole paragraph. Remember that example of buying the ticket to San Francisco — the point is that it is very important to buy the ticket. It does not matter how much money it costs because the ticket is necessary to meet the business partners in San Francisco. But if one does not buy the ticket, then the business plans in San Francisco fail. The person who keeps yakking on “buy the ticket buy the ticket” will naturally, obviously say get on the plane. So that still proves the main idea was buying the ticket, NOT getting on the plane.
Let’s look at Mark 16:11, 13-14, and 16-17.
Mark 16:13 “And they went and told it unto the residue: neither believed they them.”
The main issue here is that they don’t believe.
Mark 16:14 “Afterward he appeared unto the eleven as they sat at meat, and upbraided them with their unbelief and hardness of heart, because they believed not them which had seen him after he was risen.”
Now obviously their problem wasn’t getting baptized, it was believing. Some of them already got dunked in the water by John the Baptist.
Mark 16:16 “He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.”
Notice this verse’s wording is similar to the idea of “one must buy the ticket and get on the plane to go to San Francisco, but if one does not buy the ticket to San Francisco then the business plan will fail”. If one can know that the main idea here was buying the ticket rather than getting on the plane, one should do the same with the Bible.
Mark 16:17 “And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues;”
It was believing, believing, believing, not baptism.
4th Argument – Author’s Style
In the Bible, the Lord teaches every doctrine is important, but that does not neglect the author’s character and style that the Lord allowed to be in His Holy Word. That’s something very humbling. He will use a flawed vessel, despite one’s character and personality, mightily for His glory, let alone inspire them as His words. For example, didn’t God use Solomon’s words in Ecclesiastes as given by inspiration even though all of the content in Ecclesiastes is him complaining about his life problems?
Mark uses “and” as something obviously expected, and it bears no necessity to the rest of the sentence.
Mark 16:2 “And very early in the morning the first day of the week, they came unto the sepulchre at the rising of the sun.”
Before he said the rising of the sun, he already said “and very early in the morning”. He used that as something that’s naturally, obviously expected.
Mark 16:4 “And when they looked, they saw that the stone was rolled away: for it was very great.”
Notice here “and when they looked”, it’s obviously expected that they saw.
Mark 16:8 “And they went out quickly, and fled from the sepulchre; for they trembled and were amazed: neither said they any thing to any man; for they were afraid.”
Notice how they went out quickly, and it obviously meant they fled.
Mark 16:10 “And she went and told them that had been with him, as they mourned and wept.”
Wept is something obviously expected when one mourns and has no necessity at all, because he already said they mourn.
Notice how he uses “and and and something” that’s obviously expected, but it bears no necessity to the rest of the text. Almost every verse in Mark 15 and 16 starts with “and”.
They completely ignored the author’s writing style. It’s like when Pastor Gene teaches, he will always use some words repetitively, but that’s the style of a person’s speech or writing.
5th Argument – Writing Pattern Similar to Other Christians
The last argument is Mark’s writing pattern. “He that believeth is saved, he that believeth not is damned.” That kind of wording was not a coincidence; he was quoting what all Christians said
For example, John 3:18, John 3:36, and 1 John 5:10.
John 3:18 “He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.”
John 3:36 “He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him.”
1 John 5:10 “He that believeth on the Son of God hath the witness in himself: he that believeth not God hath made him a liar; because he believeth not the record that God gave of his Son.”
So since all Christians kept repeating that over and over again, Mark knew that was the main idea. That’s what he was simply doing. That “and” part is just his style.
A lot of liberals use the Gospel of Mark as a copycat of what all the other apostles were doing. So there is no doubt there was a writing pattern that was shared similarly with other Christians. Even atheists and liberals know that.