Ron Halbrook, 3505 Horse Run Ct., Shepherdsville, KY 40165-6954 (halbrook@twc.

com)

DOES THE BAPTIZER MAKE THE BAPTISM INVALID?

The validity of baptism depends on the heart of the person who submits to baptism, not on the
condition of the person who performs the baptism. To be scripturally baptized, a sinner must believe in
Christ as the perfect sacrifice for our sins (Jn. 3:16), must repent of his sins (Acts 2:38), must confess the
deity of Jesus Christ (Acts 8:37; Rom. 10:10), and must be baptized in order to receive forgiveness of his
sins by God’s grace (Mk. 16:16; Acts 2:38; 22:16). The condition of the baptizer is never discussed in
Scripture because it is incidental and has no effect on the baptism.

In some cases a person submits to baptism without faith in Christ because they have another agenda,
such as desiring to marry a young lady who wants to marry a Christian or perhaps to improve their
record as an inmate in prison. There are people who claim to believe in Jesus but who do not repent of
their sins – they are baptized simply to soothe their conscience or thinking they can deceive God and
escape His judgment. There are people who are immersed without confessing the deity of Jesus Christ
because they have been deceived by false teachers such as Jehovah’s Witnesses or Iglesia ni Cristo
(1914). No such baptisms are acceptable to God. All such people need to be immersed again in
accordance with the true and original gospel of Christ.

Some people are taught that God forgives their sins the moment they believe in Jesus – before water
baptism. James is very clear when he says, “Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by
faith only” (Ja. 2:24). Not by faith only! This does not mean we are saved by works of merit so as to
earn salvation, but it means the only saving faith is obedient faith. False teachers convince people they
are saved at the point of faith before baptism, and then they baptize them as “an outward sign of an
inward grace,” meaning to demonstrate that they have already been saved. Or, they baptize them in
order to let them “join the church of your choice,” such as a Baptist Church, a United Pentecostal
Church, or some other manmade denomination. We must reach out with clarity and patience to teach
such people “the truth in love” (Eph. 4:15) – their baptism is not valid. This is not the “one baptism”
commanded by Christ (Eph. 4:5).

The reason such baptisms are invalid is not because the baptizer did not know the truth. Those
baptisms are invalid because the people being baptized did not know the truth and, therefore, they
have not “obeyed from the heart” the true and original gospel of Christ (Rom. 6:17). I have known
people in the denominations who studied their Bibles on their own and came to realize denominational
baptism is not true Bible baptism. They did not know any of our brethren, but they learned the same
truth we preach. They then requested the denominational preacher to baptize them “for the remission
of sins” in order to obey the true gospel of Christ, not to join a denomination (Acts 2:38). Such people
do not need to be baptized again, but we should receive them as faithful Christians.

I know of a case in the Philippines where there is no true church of Christ. A lady who traveled to this
place to visit her deathly-ill mother was able to convince her to obey the gospel. Since no Christian men
were available for many miles around, she baptized her for the remission of her sins through the blood
of the Lamb. Such cases are very rare, but they can and do happen.

Would it be better to let such a person die without obeying the gospel when there are no available
Christian men? No! This lady did the right thing in this unusual situation. This does not mean that when
people respond to the appeals of evangelists, our preachers will then invite women to perform the
baptisms. We all agree this would be out of order because men should lead in the work and worship of
the church (1 Tim. 2:11-12). The only question here is what should be done when no men are available
to baptize a sinner seeking salvation.

I regret to hear that some Filipino brethren continue to generate strife by insisting that baptism is valid
only if performed by a faithful male Christian and all baptisms performed by anyone else are invalid. We
all agree that in most cases baptisms result from gospel preachers who convince people to obey the
gospel. Any occasion where an unbeliever or a woman needs to baptize a person is very rare, but there
are cases where this does occur. The baptism is still valid if the person who is baptized believes in
Christ, repents of his sins, and confesses the deity of Jesus Christ.

The sooner this controversy dies, the better it will be for the cause of Christ. Hashing and rehashing this
matter is wasting valuable time while sinners die lost in their sins every moment. When we stir this
controversy, we let Satan manipulate us to destroy our unity and to spread division, thus making our
work less effective in saving the lost!

Also, if it is true that baptism is valid only if performed by a faithful male Christian, all of us must trace
our baptism all the way back to the Apostles lest there be one woman or unbeliever in the chain which
would cancel our salvation today!

Brother Jim McDonald gave permission for his recent observations to be shared as follows:
Jim McDonald’s Observations on Who May Baptize Someone

I am sorry to hear the problems that exist regarding whether one must be baptized by a saved person
else his baptism is not valid. Those who argue that one must be baptized by a preacher or a Christian,
i.e., a Christian, do not realize the consequences of their position.

First, there are no qualifications given touching the person who baptizes a believer; for to do so, makes
the salvation of a person who desires to be baptized dependent upon the salvation of the one who
baptizes him or her.

If the person who is the baptizer must be saved, then no one could ever be sure whether he is saved or
lost. Because if my salvation depends upon the salvation of the one who baptizes me, the salvation of
the one who baptizes me depends upon the salvation of the one who baptized him, and so on until we
get all the way back to the Apostles. Thus, you have a person’s salvation dependent upon the salvation
of hundreds of others. And, how can you know the person who baptized you was saved himself? Yes,
he may have been baptized by a preacher or a member of the church, but who really knows whether
that person or the person before him or the person before him truly believed? And if he did not truly
believe when he was baptized, he was not saved. And who knows whether a person truly believes or
not? Only God. I could never be sure I am saved if this position is true. If, in that long line of people
who baptized other people from the Apostles, just one did not believe, thus was not saved, then all who
were baptized after him were lost.

Second, this position assures us that no one is saved or can be saved today. The Apostles warned that a
falling away would take place and it did take place. The church went into apostasy. Catholicism was the
result. Now what? There were no truly saved people to baptize other people, so no one can be saved.
Those who are insisting that only a preacher or a member of the church (i.e. a saved person) can baptize
a believer has consigned the whole of mankind to condemnation with never a hope of salvation because
there is no saved person to baptize them.

I could as easily and reasonably argue that unless a saved person taught me the gospel I could not be
saved as to argue that only a saved person can baptize a sinner and that sinner be saved. There are
some Bibles that are recorded so that blind people can hear the word, and when that blind person hears
that tape or record of the Bible being read by a man who is not saved, should that person come to
believe what that man said when he read from the scripture, is his faith no good because he did not
come to believe from what a saved person read to him? I am almost afraid to pose such a question for
fear that someone would take up that foolish position.

Jesus said, “He that believe and is baptized shall be saved.” He did not say, “He that believeth (if the
preacher that preached to him is saved) and is baptized shall be saved,” any more than he said, “He that
believeth and is baptized (if the one who baptizes him is saved) shall be saved.” Jesus said, “He that
believeth and is baptized shall be saved.” If I believe that Jesus is the Son of God because He said (and
proved) He is and repent of my sins (because he commanded me to do so) and am baptized (because I
believe Him when he said I must be), I will “be saved.” Nothing is said about him who baptizes me. If
Jesus said nothing about the saved (or lost) condition of the one who taught me the gospel, and said
nothing about the saved (or lost) condition of the one who baptizes me, who am I to add to what Jesus
said? Did God not say, “Add thou not to his words lest he reprove thee and thou be found a liar” (Prov.
30:6)?

We must continue to pray for those who insist that only a preacher or a member baptize a penitent
sinner for that sinner's baptism to be valid cease to press their theory. I must love them and do them no
harm. And I would urge them to reconsider the pressing of their theory when basically they are
preaching about something that no one is going to go out and do: find someone who is not a Christian to
baptize me. Who among any of the brethren are asking the non-believer to baptize those who wish to
be saved?

Yours in Christ,

Jim McDonald