M
- Status
G
GeorgeTheWild
Guest
You’re right, the Bible doesn’t explicitly say that Jesus was baptized by immersion, but it does waggle its eyebrows suggestively and gesture furtively while mouthing 'look over there’. The majority*of Baptists also do not believe that full immersion is required. If that was the case, we would be unable to baptize those who were unable to climb down the steps to be dunked in the baptistry. Most Baptists recognize all forms of baptism as valid (except infant which is another discussion). We choose to practice full immersion because we believe it is the most historically accurate, and it is rich in symbolism.
One reason that Baptists choose to almost exclusively use full immersion because it portrays the symbolism of Romans 6:4 very well.
Here is how the pastor of my Church generally baptizes someone:
Pastor: Is it your profession of faith that Jesus is your Savior and Lord?
Person being baptized: It is my confession.
Pastor: Then based on the obedience of your confession, I baptize you my brother/sister in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.
[lowers the person in the water]
Pastor: Buried with him in Baptism
[raises the person out of the water]
Pastor: Raised to a new life to go and sin no more.
Congregation: :clapping: :extrahappy:
The imagery of baptism is twofold. First, it shows the picture of Jesus’ death, burial, and resurrection. Second, it shows the repentance of the person being baptized. When the person is lowered into the water, it symbolizes Jesus’ sacrificial death and burial. It also paints a picture of the person’s repentance. They are literally saying they have died to their old sinful nature. When the person is raised out of the water, it symbolizes Jesus’ resurrection. It also shows that the person has been justified by the blood of Christ and has been raised to a new life of sanctification leading to ultimate glorification.
*Southern Baptists congregations are autonomous from the general convention for most specific beliefs. Individual congregations could choose to believe that full immersion is required. This however, is not the norm.
L
lcmoore55
Guest
I don’t think there’s anything wrong with baptism by immersion. However I have heard it said by some Presbyterian ministers (I used to be Presbyterian) that sprinking is their preferred way to baptize, saying it is better symbolically. Their reasoning was that immersion was more a sign of judgment (think Noah, or the Egyptians in the Red Sea) than sprinkling or pouring, which was a sign of cleansing (sprinkling the blood in the Holy of Holies, pouring out of the Holy Spirit, etc). When a Baptist would point out to them Romans 6:4 they would point out Jesus was not buried, but entombed.
Right after posting this I thought of verses which speaks of God “pouring out His wrath”!
Definitely not a hill on which to die!
Right after posting this I thought of verses which speaks of God “pouring out His wrath”!
Definitely not a hill on which to die!
F
Farsight001
Guest
If he is adamant about it being exactly the same way Jesus was baptized, then ask him if he was baptized 1)in a river 2)by a man named John 3)while wearing a robe and sandals
Because if not, he didn’t do it exactly the way Jesus did, and so his baptism is invalid. At least scripture is clear that it was in a river by a man named John while wearing a robe and sandals. That can’t be said for full immersion.
N
Nicea325
Guest
Do those Baptist baptize at the Jordan River? Are they 30 years old? Do those Baptists walk to work and everywhere like Jesus? Some people go to the extreme and take things way out-of-context.Please help me explain this from a Catholic perspective. I can’t put my finger on why this sounds odd.
Visiting a Baptist church today, they said you must be baptized by immersion because “that’s why Jesus did” and that the word baptize means “to go under.”
P
PbloPicasso
Guest
I would like to take off on this statement to ask “how do you know that they submerged full body and why they 'require/required that form of submersion?”
Interesting question though. Baptisto : Greek for submerge. The justification is that this word means to submerge and therefore the term was never changed.
I see a problem with some of this that I’ll outline numberically:
- Jesus rising out of the water does not imply he was either fully submerged or partially submerged. Based on the text there is no definitive way to know which.
- The Jordan, I hear and have seen in pictures, tends to be very shallow, too shallow for a full-body submersion. Also debateable.
- This is not the same ritual that the Jews performed. Most people assume this is the same ritual Christians do for their own baptism for the forgiveness of sin. Not true. Jesus was not baptized in the name of the father and of the son and of the holy spirit.
- There are other examples where the word for submerge are used that is used to mean washed, not submerged. This was new to me when I was considering becoming Catholic.
- How would you know if it wasn’t for tradition? I need to think about this question.
- I’ll bring this one up later if I’m still in the mood.
P
PbloPicasso
Guest
Actually, what you have described here is the preferred method of baptism. I took it to be the only valid method until I read the Didache. Infanct baptism is another subject, but after kicking it around for a very very long time over years I finally came to understand.
Remember when God would have killed Moses yet his wife circumcised their boy and touched Moses on the foot? It saved his life. After, circumcism was required of all males, 8 days old. I’m not going to go into this now but I did want to throw it out there for you to look up, since you brought up infant baptism. I’m convinced now that infant baptisms are not only valid but preferred and that the ones we read about in the bible are from adults in the initial stages of Christianity where the adult had to choose first and then they baptized whole families. We can split off and chat about it, but it’s been covered.
C
Contarini
Guest
I think that’s a really weak line of argument.
The 19th-century Methodist Richard Watson took this approach. He actually argued that immersion was part of the growth of “ritualism” in the early Church (in other words, it was too Catholic
). He also argued that when you are wet and shivering you can’t have the solemn thoughts you ought to be having at such a time, and that the practice is immodest.From my perspective, this is a good collection of bad ways to think about baptism!
Edwin
C
Contarini
Guest
P
PJM
Guest
Here is the Mandate from Jesus Himself… it does NOT specift immersion.Visiting a Baptist church today, they said you must be baptized by immersion because “that’s why Jesus did” and that the word baptize means “to go under.”
John.3: Jesus answered, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.
I don’t beleive that the Bible is anymore specific then this.
The CC holds BOTH forms of baptism as valid: Pouring of water; in the name of the Father, the Son and The Holy Spirit…
Or Immersion using the same language.
God Bless,
Pat
M
Matthew_P_Muehl
Guest
Hello Nicea325, My point to atara was other forms of Baptism are valid other than Immersion.
I thought the Baptist were a Bible based religion. No where in the Bible does it state that Christ was Baptized by Full Immersion!
Matthew
J
JHow
Guest
You raise some good points about the symbolism, which I think provide support for immersion as being particularly good way to express this symbolism. Here is how the CC describes it:
Also, a bit later, it has this to say:
And in the “summing it all up” section at the end…
To the poster who asked about whether or not Baptists baptize in rivers today - it is not unheard of in rural areas. I have witnessed baptisms in rivers and even in the Atlantic ocean (not Catholic, of course).
To the point about the river being shallow, it is not too much trouble to hollow out a pool even in a shallow river. I have in mind one church I knew in West Virginia, where the baptismal font (if I can call it that) was a pool in a very shallow (and ice-cold) river (creek, really) behind the church.
P
PJM
Guest
Friend, I have no reason to doubt your word
That said; ask the Preacher for the biblical mandate that specifies Immersion as the ONLY Valid Baptism; and how does he explain the words of God Himself in John 3:5?
The preacher is incorrect, I beleif in his limited understanding. My searching the Bible could find no evidence for ONLY his position; although Baptism by Immersion in the Name of the Holy Trinity; is a valid form.
God Bless,
Pat
L
lcmoore55
Guest
I dunno, their arguments sound just as good as the “immersion only” crowd in my opinion…well, Watson’s argument is strange, no doubt.I think that’s a really weak line of argument.
The 19th-century Methodist Richard Watson took this approach. He actually argued that immersion was part of the growth of “ritualism” in the early Church (in other words, it was too Catholic
From my perspective, this is a good collection of bad ways to think about baptism!
Edwin
Baptizo does not always mean immersion, period. It can - and most of the time it does. But to argue “immersion only” is silly since it can also refer to ritual washings. The article on the catholic.com site “Baptism: Immersion Only?” is a good one.
A
agent_grey
Guest
The important part is that baptism has an underlying reality. If it is nothing more than a symbolic ritual than it is an abomination like ALL other symbolic religous acts.
S
SteveVH
Guest
You might want to ask your Baptist friends why they don’t use wine in their communion because “that’s what Jesus did”.Please help me explain this from a Catholic perspective. I can’t put my finger on why this sounds odd.
Visiting a Baptist church today, they said you must be baptized by immersion because “that’s why Jesus did” and that the word baptize means “to go under.”
As far as immersion, it is used extensively in the Catholic Church for adults at Easter Vigil. It is not normally used for infants for obvious reasons. Since Baptists do not perform infant baptisms they would really have no reason not to use full immersion.
A
atara
Guest
Thanks everyone. This thread has really helped me understand both sides much better.
I never realized that the Bible actually does not give specific instructions on HOW to baptize. DER!
I never realized that the Bible actually does not give specific instructions on HOW to baptize. DER!
S
StTommyMore
Guest
The only real insruction of “how” in the Scriptures is the Trinitarian formulation on Matthew 28"18-20Thanks everyone. This thread has really helped me understand both sides much better.
I never realized that the Bible actually does not give specific instructions on HOW to baptize. DER!
- Status