Question 20: Does it not run counter to the evangelical character of the New Covenant to make an ...

Question 20: Does it not run counter to the evangelical character of the New Covenant to make an outward ceremony indispensably necessary for salvation? Is this not rather identical with the doctrine of the old Law-zealots against whom Paul wrote so emphatically in his letters to the Galatians and the Colossians?

Answer: We do not make of outward baptism anything else than what is commanded by Scripture. Since it says that believers should be baptized, we consider it disobedience to oppose that which God has commanded. Whoever opposes God in one thing - even if it is as insignificant as outward baptism - such a person will be properly punished for this disobedience. However, I do not think that a single commandment of the Lord Jesus dare be considered insignificant, if we consider the power and might of the Sovereign without reluctance. Concerning that about which Paul wrote to the Galatians and Colossians, it has only to do with the laws of the servant Moses, because they were too weak (see Hebrews 7:18). The Galatians wanted to follow these laws in order to be spared the cross of Christ and to set aside the teachings of Jesus. Paul reminded them of the baptism when he wrote: "For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ" (Galatians 3:27). Consequently, Paul is not at all against baptism, but rather for it.