Baptism

What is your take on baptism? I've been wrestling with this a lot recently.

I agree with Colonel Richard Munn who stated The Salvation Army's stance on the issue: "With regard to tradition, the Army views itself as providing a distinctive witness to the universal Church concerning the non-observance of sacraments. Salvationists stand as a reminder to the Church that grace is mediated from Christ, not Christ and prescribed ceremony." (In his article: An Army of Salvation)

This past week, one of my core classes was focused on Baptism. Baptism's necessity was affirmed, not for salvation, but for some different communal and individual accomplishments. Communally - to recognize the need for accountability and to acknowledge this person's commitment to be beneficial on the communal level (for the Body of Christ) as well as on an individual level. Individually - in being baptized, a person is being brought to his or her right place in God's Meta-Narrative (Grand Story). This is a twist on the issue, for me, because I thought it was always argued that baptism is intended to be a means of salvation and receiving grace, but this is not always the case.

The main argument in class was that baptism is not necessary for receiving grace but it is still necessary for Christians. Christ commanded it to be done and it is as such necessary for believers to be baptized. (I really think I am justifying the argument well, but please correct me if this isn't the case.)

I brought the point in class that, personally, I have had every good result of what they brought up about baptism - communally and individually - yet I have not been baptized, and have witnessed this in the lives of others as well. I argued that the meaning for which baptism is done is essential, of course, but that water baptism is not necessary for the person who believes. My reasoning is: If the meanings of baptism can be accomplished through the power of the Holy Spirit outside of water baptism (this I testify to be experiencing, and do witness others to experience it as well), and baptism is done solely in order to accomplish these certain communal and individual needs, the result is that the physical act of baptism is, at most, very useful in portraying the subject, but baptism is not something needed to have been done.

Let me contrast with foot washing: Jesus said that this was to be done among believers, and while the essence of humble service is evident in genuine Christians, it is not portrayed in the act of washing feet. In this way, I feel like I am experiencing unity in the Body of Christ and unity with God, because of the commitment I have made to Him in the presence and community of other believers, in accepting His commitment so graciously and faithfully made to me. It is argued that foot washing was meant to be a metaphor, and the reasoning is that we don't see the early church continually practicing the act. But why should our lesser response to this commandment be determined to be as such in view of the early church's lack of practicing it? I find it inconsistent to respond differently to these two commands.

My very limited experience and understanding leads me to the following consideration: we must determine what Jesus is commanding. Is Jesus commanding us to (physically/ritually) reenact the Lord's Supper in remembrance of Him, or is He commanding us to (spiritually/daily) live in unity with one another in Him? Is Jesus commanding us to (physically/ritually) wash each others feet, or is He commanding us to (spiritually/daily) live in humble service toward each other? Is Jesus commanding us to (physically/ritually) be baptized with water in the Name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, or to (spiritually/daily) live in unity with other people as the body of Christ, and in unity with Christ Himself?

I'm in a hurry, because I need to go to work. But I hope this is clear and humble, not worded offensively toward any opinion or denomination. Please share your thoughts!