Agnostic Baptism

Scottish Enlightenment philosopher David Hume contended that meaningful statements about the universe are always qualified by some degree of doubt. He asserted that the fallibility of human beings means that they cannot obtain absolute certainty except in trivial cases where a statement is true by definition (e.g. tautologies such as "all bachelors are unmarried" or "all triangles have three corners").[25]

Agnosticism is just the belief we cannot be certain about spiritual truths. Agnostic baptism is the idea we can hold no clear doctrine because the truth surrounding baptism is clouded and uncertain. Therefore it is impossible to hold to and require a certain tenet of faith about baptism.

Karl Ketcherside (a 1970's teacher) accepted almost all faiths concerning believer's baptism.

Karl Ketcherside believed baptism was taught with human opinions and deductions, therefore many of the divisions concerning baptism were of an ungodly origin.

Karl Ketcherside's belief, "man did not have to understand and believe that baptism was for the remission of sins" ,was a very agnostic doctrine.

Ketcherside took the approach that Mark 16:15-16 was enough to teach baptism, and that passages such as Acts 2:38 were clouded in doubt and therefore unnecessary.

In Ketcherside's view believing baptism was for salvation was enough. His proof text was Mark 16:15-16.

Mar 16:15 And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.

Mar 16:16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.

In Ketcherside's view, If the person believed he was accepting salvation in baptism, he did not have to believe it was for the remission of sins.

This would prove a disconnect in understanding, for salvation always involves remission of sins.

What if a person believed he had to be baptized but did not believe it connected you to the death of Christ. It would be a cross-less baptism.

Ketcherside it seems left out the command to preach the Gospel before baptizing, which would teach the purpose beforehand.

Mark 16:15-16 required teaching first, so the person would understand the purpose.

Mar 16:15 And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.

Mar 16:16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.

Christ required us to believe what was taught, not just going through the service. Accepting baptism without a clear teaching of purpose would be faithless to some degree.

Ketcherside believed it to be too confusing, but the writer of Hebrews considered it an elementary principle.

Heb 6:1 Therefore leaving the principles of the doctrine of Christ, let us go on unto perfection; not laying again the foundation of repentance from dead works, and of faith toward God,

Heb 6:2 Of the doctrine of baptisms, and of laying on of hands, and of resurrection of the dead, and of eternal judgment.

Notice the instruction of baptisms was a doctrine of Christ. We are supposed to know the differences between John's baptism and Christian baptism.

It is an area of clear teaching from the Holy Spirit, and not a matter introduced initially by Peter or Paul's opinions.

Acts 2:38 was from the Holy Spirit, not a later deduction by man as Ketcherside categorized it..