Skip to content

Add your phone number?

Optional. Nothing is sent unless you choose it.

The Historic Faith
Sign in
Question 3
The chapter claims early Christians tied three realities to water baptism—remission of sins, new birth, and illumination; which of those three feels most foreign or uncomfortable to you, and what do you think that discomfort reveals about your current theology of salvation?
Another way to ask: Early Christians connected baptism with forgiveness of sins, new birth, and “illumination.” Which one feels strangest to you, and what does that show about how you think salvation works?

Direct Answer The transcript doesn’t tell which one should feel most uncomfortable to you personally, but it suggests many evangelicals may find any of the three—especially remission of sins and new birth through water—foreign because baptism is often viewed as secondary. That discomfort likely reveals how strongly one’s salvation framework has been trained to separate baptism from forgiveness and regeneration.

Support from Transcript:

  • David says early Christians tied baptism to “three very important matters”: “remission of sins,” “the new birth,” and “spiritual illumination.”
  • Remission: they believed baptism “canceled all past sins,” and he quotes Justin on being “washed… for the remission of sins.”
  • New birth: he says they believed baptism was “the channel through which a person was born again,” citing Irenaeus: “born again through water and the Spirit.”
  • Illumination: he says the newly baptized received “a clearer vision of spiritual matters,” and Clement calls baptism “illumination.”
  • He notes modern contrast: baptism today is “often regarded as… insignificant… in the process of salvation.”
Discussion Follow-ups Which part of your salvation story (forgiveness, rebirth, Spirit-given clarity) do you instinctively place at a different moment than baptism? Why?