John Piper on 1 Peter 3:21 and Baptismal Regeneration
Jared C. Wilson Blog | May 15, 2012
Baptism, which corresponds to this, now saves you, not as a removal of dirt from the body but as an appeal to God for a good conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ . . .And here are Piper's words on it:
-- 1 Peter 3:21
In verse 19, Peter reminds the readers that, in the spirit, Jesus had gone to preach to the people in Noah's day, whose spirits are now in prison awaiting judgment. (I don't take the position that verse 19 refers to Jesus' preaching in hell between Good Friday and Easter.) But there was tremendous evil and hardness in Noah's day and only eight people enter the ark for salvation from the judgment through water.
Now Peter sees a comparison between the waters of the flood and the waters of baptism. Verse 21 is the key verse: "And corresponding to that [the water of the flood], 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." Now there are some denominations that love this verse because it seems at first to support the view called "baptismal regeneration." That is, baptism does something to the candidate: it saves by bringing about new birth. So, for example, one of the baptismal liturgies for infants says, "Seeing now, dearly beloved brethren, that this child is regenerate, and grafted into the body of Christ's Church, let us give thanks."
Now the problem with this is that Peter seems very aware that his words are open to dangerous misuse. This is why, as soon as they are out of his mouth, as it were, he qualifies them lest we take them the wrong way. In verse 21 he does say, "Baptism now saves you" - that sounds like the water has a saving effect in and of itself apart from faith. He knows that is what it sounds like and so he adds immediately, "Not the removal of dirt from the flesh, but an appeal to God for a good conscience - through the resurrection of Jesus Christ." (Or your version might have: "the pledge of a good conscience toward God").
But the point seems to be this: When I speak of baptism saving, Peter says, I don't mean that the water, immersing the body and cleansing the flesh, is of any saving effect; what I mean is that, insofar as baptism is "an appeal to God for a good conscience," (or is "a pledge of a good conscience toward God"), it saves. Paul said in Romans 10:13, "Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord - everyone who appeals to the Lord - will be saved." Paul does not mean that faith alone fails to save. He means that faith calls on God. That's what faith does. Now Peter is saying, "Baptism is the God-ordained, symbolic expression of that call to God. It is an appeal to God - either in the form of repentance or in the form of commitment."
Comments:
May 22, 2012 at 02:37 PM
Deacon Dave - You are fighting a straw man. No one who believes that baptism is necessary to our salvation would deny that we are saved by Grace. What is Grace, and how does God give His Grace to people? - these are the real questions that get to the bottom of the disagreement.
As for chapter and verse showing the necessity of baptism, well 1 Peter 3:21, which Piper tries to explain away, is a pretty good one. Also Acts 2:38, and John 3:5, and Mark 16:16, Romans 6:3-6, 1 Corinthians 12:13, and Galatians 3:27.
May 21, 2012 at 07:54 PM
this comment is to be a disscusion starter, so my post will be brief; if we can git just one book past the gospels, PAUL tells us over and over; GRACE plus NOTHING = salvation. ergo, baptizim is an act of works. no one gets to heaven by virtue of works. if i,am wrong , please quote chap. / verse.. thanx DD
May 18, 2012 at 12:24 PM
Peter is not "qualifying" his statement that Baptism saves. He is clarifying how baptism saves. Baptism is salvific in that it deals with the interior life (purification of concience) as opposed to an exterior cleansing. Baptism purifies our conscience because it is "for the remission of sins" (Acts 2:38). Peter says twice in the same sentence that baptisms "saves you". It saves by the resurrection of Jesus. Piper's hermeneutical gymnastics run contrary to the clear meaning of Scripture related to baptism, and to the entire historical Church's understanding of Baptism prior to the radical reformation.
May 18, 2012 at 07:48 PM
I agree that it isn't the water alone that saves but rather it is the Baptismal water WITH THE WORD. Our apprehension of Christ, if it is not through Word and Sacrament, then it has to be completely a "how much reality of Christ can I muster within" which is an absolute subjective undertaking. This is a ridiculous notion. When Christ says "Take... eat and drink... this IS my body and blood... broken and shed for you for the forgiveness of sin" one doesn't have to ask what He means by 'is.' The ark upon which Noah and his family are saved, through the water no less, is a foreshadowing of Christ. When Peter uses '...a pledge towards a good conscience' is he not making an appeal to have confidence in what God has done in Baptism and I would say God does the same for us in Communion through the wine and bread; otherwise we have to direct ourselves inward for any assurance.
May 16, 2012 at 08:22 AM
I always found this verse to be confusing, especially since I grew up Roman Catholic. This was helpful, and it further supports believer baptism, not infant baptism.
Mitchell Hammonds
May 22, 2012 at 09:08 AM
According to Romans 6:3-4 baptism is the means God uses to kill the old man. 1 Peter 3:18-22 is also an interesting verse in that it highlights God's work in bringing Noah and his family through the flood and parallels that specific work towards us by means of baptism.
"Baptism now saves you" can't be any more clearer.