Let's look at some of the "may" verses —

(John 3:14-15) Just as Moses lifted up the snake in the desert, so the Son of Man must be lifted up, that everyone who believes in him may have eternal life."

(John 20:31) But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name.

(Gal. 2:15-16) “We who are Jews by birth and not ‘Gentile sinners’ know that a man is not justified by observing the law, but by faith in Jesus Christ. So we, too, have put our faith in Christ Jesus that we may be justified by faith in Christ and not by observing the law, because by observing the law no one will be justified.”

Now, notice first that the vast majority of the verses that speak in terms of all with faith being saved do not speak in terms of "may." But the "may" verses certainly exist — in the English.

But in the Greek, things are less clear. In John 3:15 and 20:10, "may have" can be subjunctive or indicative. If it's subjunctive, the hypothesis is whether you believe. For example, "If you finish your homework, you may have ice cream." The promise is firm but conditioned. "May" refers to whether you meet the stated condition (finish homework) — not an unmentioned condition. Hence, "may have eternal life" is conditioned, not on baptism, but on faith, which is clearly the intended hypothesis.

In Gal 2:16, "may" is not in the Greek, as the verb form is indicative, not subjunctive.

You can check these conclusions and research other Greek verb forms at http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/

I agree that John 1:12-13 doesn't say what happens in judgment if we have faith but do not get baptized. In fact, I don't know of any scripture that specifically answers that question. (John 3:3-5 comes closest I think…) However, John 1:12-13 does describe people who believe as being given power/right/authority to "become" sons of God. That is consistent with every major translation I know of.

1 Peter brings this out, “who through faith are shielded by God's power until the coming of the salvation that is ready to be revealed in the last time” So much for the “if you were going to die tonight where would you go?” through faith the kind of faith you have before you are baptized we are shielded.

Whats the implication human responsibility or fatalism are not the answers. I always loved what Jesus did at the wedding he turned water into wine. What is being revealed in these passages is how salvation happens we are like the jars of water being asked for by jesus to presented as the best wine for wonderful God,

I tend to think Alan has a point that deserves deeper thought. I agree that the term "right" is better translated "empowered"; I think that is more consistent with many of the remaining faith/believe/belief verses in John. However, neither term answers the question. In reading this post, it struck me, for the first time, how many times you see the terms faith or believe coupled with the permissive term "may". If weight is given to the term "may" in many of these passages, then it becomes much easier to reconcile them with the repent, believe and be baptized verses. To cut to the chase, we end up with our faith in Jesus giving us permission to submit to His lordship and receive God's grace in baptism.

[NOTE: That having been said, I have not studied the greek that is being translated as "may" in the verses; so, please feel free to redirect any discrepency in this argument based upon a misuse of that term.]

You wrote, "I think baptism and predestination as combined theology fixes such challenges of free will and baptismal ideologies." How does that work? You've got me interested.

I entirely agree that Jesus' baptism is an example of how baptism works for Christians — we become God's children, we receive the Spirit, and we are declared to be well-pleasing to God.

John 1:12-13 is an intriguing passage. It could be read as saying that faith gives one power (a better reading than "right" based on parallels in John) to be saved (by being baptized). But that reading runs contrary to literally dozens of verses in John that say all with faith are saved.

Moreover, the clause at the end contrasts being born of God with being born of "human decision or a husband's will" — obviously saying it's not human will but God's will. This is not teaching Calvinistic election so much as the fact that salvation follows faith is because God — not humans — causes those with faith to be saved.

Birth obviously suggests John 3 — being born of water and the Spirit. Birth by the Spirit is plainly God's doing and God's choice. We think of birth by water as our choice.

However, I've long preferred Luther's take on baptism. It's a gift — not a work. We don't cause God to do anything. Rather, upon our faith, we receive God's blessing in the form of baptism. And faith qualifies us for the blessing.

And so, I don't see 1:12-13 telling us what happens if we fail to be properly baptized. The underlying assumption is that those with faith will be baptized. But if we fail to be baptized out of ignorance (not rebellion), does God's will that we become his children overrule our ignorance?

I think this verse provides a sort of key to the puzzle:

(John 1:12-13) Yet to all who received him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God—children born not of natural descent, nor of human decision or a husband’s will, but born of God.

Note that those who believe get the *right to become* children of God. At the point of faith prior to baptism, they have the right to become children of God, but have not yet done so.