A Question About Baptism

Albion said:

Of course not. So use immersion in your church if that is the preference, but the use of water is what is required.

My comment about "sprinkling" was that this method is NOT the most common, although people who don't approve of pouring seem to enjoy saying the word "sprinkling" when ridiculing the churches that don't ordinarily use total immersion.

We don't know that he was immersed and the Bible does not tell us that he was immersed.

Rivers have banks, and so did the River Jordan. The places used by people for crossings and etc. are shallow, hardly capable of immersing anyone unless they were laid down flat. And by the way, if you were totally immersed and then stood up, you wouldn't actually be from the water, but still standing in it!

Whoever we may be speaking of, when a person leaves a body of water, he is often said to come "up" as he walks progressively into shallower water and then steps up onto the bank, completely out of the water.

It is also instructive to know that one of the very earliest of Christian murals shows Christ standing in the river with water being poured upon his head.

Click to expand...

It is also instructive to know that one of the very earliest of Christian murals shows Christ standing in the river with water being poured upon his head.

Click to expand...

Lots of pictures/murals about a lot of things .... of which are just their idea(s) about things .... pictures depicting various stories in the bible ... nobody knows exactly for sure about these things.

It is symbolic of dying/buried in Christ and being resurrected .... if people don't see the symbolism then don't know what to say. People can follow their own conscience.

Albion said:

Of course not. So use immersion in your church if that is the preference, but the use of water is what is required.

My comment about "sprinkling" was that this method is NOT the most common, although people who don't approve of pouring seem to enjoy saying the word "sprinkling" when ridiculing the churches that don't ordinarily use total immersion.



We don't know that he was immersed and the Bible does not tell us that he was immersed.


Rivers have banks, and so did the River Jordan. The places used by people for crossings and etc. are shallow, hardly capable of immersing anyone unless they were laid down flat. And by the way, if you were totally immersed and then stood up, you wouldn't actually be from the water, but still standing in it!

Whoever we may be speaking of, when a person leaves a body of water, he is often said to come "up" as he walks progressively into shallower water and then steps up onto the bank, completely out of the water.

It is also instructive to know that one of the very earliest of Christian murals shows Christ standing in the river with water being poured upon his head.

Click to expand...

Matthew 3:6 Mark 1:5 and "in Aenon near Salim, because there was much water there" John 3:23 Only immersion would require "much water."

John immersed Jesus. He baptized Jesus "in the Jordan" and after the baptism Jesus "came up out of the water" Mark 1:9, 10, Matthew 3:16

The apostolic church baptized by immersion also. When Philip the evangelist baptized the Ethiopian eunuch they both "went down into the water" and "came up out of the water" Acts 8:38, 39

Of course not. So use immersion in your church if that is the preference, but the use of water is what is required.

Click to expand...

I don't go to church ... I study the bible and related things.

Seems pretty clear to me immersion .... others think and do otherwise, fine ... let their conscience be their guide.

Well...I was raised in a nominal Mormon household, and was baptized at eight years of age, as are most children brought up in the church.

I "resigned" my membership when I was around 21, then after a few decades of wandering I joined a congregation of the Lutheran Church Missouri Synod.

I talked with my Pastor, he was of the impression that I should be baptized a second time

eleos1954 said:

Lots of pictures/murals about a lot of things .... of which are just their idea(s) about things .... pictures depicting various stories in the bible ... nobody knows exactly for sure about these things.

Click to expand...

Not 'for sure,' but it's one more piece of evidence that the earliest Christians, who might be expected to have the Apostolic teaching on the matter in mind, thought of Christ as being baptized by standing while having water poured over him.

Matthew 3:6 Mark 1:5 and "in Aenon near Salim, because there was much water there" John 3:23 Only immersion would require "much water."

Click to expand...

3
Wrong. The place you are referring to was an area known for a lot of shallow pools. That's the "much water" reference there. It verifies the fact that water was an essential ingredient in the sacrament, but not that it had to be administered by immersion.

John immersed Jesus. He baptized Jesus "in the Jordan" and after the baptism Jesus "came up out of the water" Mark 1:9, 10, Matthew 3:16

Click to expand...

I've already explained why that doesn't refer to immersion. Or at least that that it need not.

The apostolic church baptized by immersion also. When Philip the evangelist baptized the Ethiopian eunuch they both "went down into the water"

Click to expand...

If they both went down according to your theory, they both would have been totally submerged, completely under the water. Does that make sense? Would there be any reason for it? Does a Baptist minister do that today when baptizing people? No, no, and no.

And if you are going to use the river, you're going to have to go "down," walk downwards, into it, right? Just as you come "up" when walking out of the water and up onto the land.

That's what anyone does when coming or going into almost any body for fly fishing, wading, or other activities.

Dok Bantis said:

I hope that this is the correct sub-forum for my question; while I am not entirely a new Christian, my question is kind of a new Christian's question.

About a dozen years ago I first officially became a Christian by being baptized into the Catholic Church (as an adult). Over time, I fell away from the Catholic Church and took a very long trip into some extremely dark places (Paganism, Witchcraft, and even Satanism). I was in severe rebellion.

As I have since returned to Christ, I find myself wondering whether I need to be baptized again. I ask partly because 1.) I spent years denying and opposing Christ, and partly because 2.) my Catholic baptism was (as many know) baptism by pouring, not by immersion.

I understand that there is likely disagreement among Christians regarding whether immersion is necessary, or if "sprinkling" is acceptable.

I appreciate input from everyone willing to share their thoughts/beliefs/proofs.

Thank you in advance!

EDITED TO ADD: I am not planning to attend the Catholic Church any longer. I will be pursuing a Protestant understanding and practice of the Faith.

Click to expand...

Very important to understand that according to the Bible we should not be baptize in the name of the "Father", or the "Son or Holy Ghost" because they are not names, but are a status to describe one's position in life; and the Holy Ghost is slang for the Holy Spirit.

Now, Jesus said to be baptized "in the name of the Father, son, and Holy Ghost", now that name that Jesus was talking about was his name. Let's get that name from Peter..."Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ. Now when they heard this, they were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, men and brethren, what shall we do? Then Peter said unto them, "repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost." (Acts1:36-38). Notice that you receive the Holy Ghost after being baptize in the name of Jesus. Jesus Christ said, "I am come in my father's name, and ye receive me not: if another shall come in his own name, him ye will receive." (John 5:43). This scripture informs us that both the father and the son's name is Jesus, because Jesus said that he came in his father's name.

If you truly love God, then we will obey "Every word" that proceeds out of his mouth (Matthew 4:4). Baptism is one of those words. In order to be baptized, certain events must take place: You must give up a lifestyle where sin has dominion, (ruler ship) over you. Sin according to 1 John 3:4, Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression (breaking) of the law. You must be taught "The Word", before you can adhere to God's commandments (judgments\statues). These laws are found in the Holy Bible; beginning with Genesis and ending with Revelation. You must believe what the bible says and finally, you must confess that Jesus is Lord. Once this has been accomplished, you are qualified to be baptized in the name of Jesus.

Another important thing to understand concerning the Baptism brother and sisters. one must be submerge under water fully. Lets take a look in Act: 35-39 Then Philip opened his mouth, and began at the same scripture, and preached unto him Jesus. And as they went on their way, they came unto a certain water: and the eunuch said, See, here is water; what doth hinder me to be baptized? And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God. And he commanded the chariot to stand still: and they went down both into the water, both Philip and the eunuch; and he baptized him. And when they were come up out of the water, the Spirit of the Lord caught away Philip, that the eunuch saw him no more: and he went on his way rejoicing.

"And he said unto them, go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned." (Mark 16:15-16). Baptism is a commandment or requirement for salvation.

Dok Bantis said:

It is my understanding that many people were baptized during NT times within their homes. This would seem to make it likely that many were not able to be submerged.

(Of course, I may be misremembering or otherwise mistaken.)

Click to expand...

Your initial post is kind of a trick question. The standard form from antiquity for baptism is triple immersion
Now in some churches you may be (re)baptised because they do not recognize any sacramental reality in your previous sect as a sacraments is a function of a church, thus your baptism in a heterodox sect being viewed as just an empty ritual. Other churches may (re)baptise you because they find fault with the form (sprinkling) thus the deficient manner voids it of being an authentic baptism. Others believe it's fine to repeat baptisms so whatever the efficacy of your previous baptism, it becomes a moot point.
Scripturally and historically baptisms are not repeated. Let's say you lived in the 1st century and the apostle Paul baptised you. Even if you lapsed and came back you would not then seek to be baptised again by Peter.
This is made clear in Ephesians 4:5-6 and in Hebrews 6:2-6.
The whole point of the parable of the prodigal son is that you don't have to do it all over again and start from the beginning.

Dok Bantis said:

It is my understanding that many people were baptized during NT times within their homes. This would seem to make it likely that many were not able to be submerged.

(Of course, I may be misremembering or otherwise mistaken.)

Click to expand...

The New Testament describes what you are referring to with private homes...and your other comment does make sense.

Albion said:

Not 'for sure,' but it's one more piece of evidence that the earliest Christians, who might be expected to have the Apostolic teaching on the matter in mind, thought of Christ as being baptized by standing while having water poured over him.

3
Wrong. The place you are referring to was an area known for a lot of shallow pools. That's the "much water" reference there. It verifies the fact that water was an essential ingredient in the sacrament, but not that it had to be administered by immersion.


I've already explained why that doesn't refer to immersion. Or at least that that it need not.



If they both went down according to your theory, they both would have been totally submerged, completely under the water. Does that make sense? Would there be any reason for it? Does a Baptist minister do that today when baptizing people? No, no, and no.

And if you are going to use the river, you're going to have to go "down," walk downwards, into it, right? Just as you come "up" when walking out of the water and up onto the land.

That's what anyone does when coming or going into almost any body for fly fishing, wading, or other activities.

Click to expand...

People can decide on their manner of baptism .... your "arguments" are based on things we/you have know idea about (conjecture) .... how much water was available .... both going down etc ..... "does that make sense" .... doesn't have to "make sense" according to conjectures .... can only go by what is written (not conjecture). Like I said ..... people can decide for themselves as they feel led by the Holy Spirit on the matter.

Scripture seems to me to support immersion .... others decide something else ... fine....
I agree to disagree.

eleos1954 said:

People can decide on their manner of baptism .... [

Click to expand...

I agree. Just so long as water is used and the Trinity is invoked, both in accord with Scripture.

can only go by what is written (not conjecture).

Click to expand...

I agree again. For instance, we cannot say that Christ was baptized by immersion when there is absolutely nothing in Scripture which says that.

Scripture seems to me to support immersion ...

Click to expand...

Possibly you never considered the facts that I presented to you but just have gone along with what somebody told you to think the wording means. (?)

I agree to disagree.

Click to expand...

Certainly. If that is where we end up, then there's still no reason for anyone to be resentful about it. None of what we've presented to each other in this exchange hasn't been said by others for centuries.

Bro.T said:

Very important to understand that according to the Bible we should not be baptize in the name of the "Father", or the "Son or Holy Ghost" because they are not names, but are a status to describe one's position in life; and the Holy Ghost is slang for the Holy Spirit.

Now, Jesus said to be baptized "in the name of the Father, son, and Holy Ghost", now that name that Jesus was talking about was his name. Let's get that name from Peter..."Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ. Now when they heard this, they were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, men and brethren, what shall we do? Then Peter said unto them, "repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost." (Acts1:36-38). Notice that you receive the Holy Ghost after being baptize in the name of Jesus. Jesus Christ said, "I am come in my father's name, and ye receive me not: if another shall come in his own name, him ye will receive." (John 5:43). This scripture informs us that both the father and the son's name is Jesus, because Jesus said that he came in his father's name.

If you truly love God, then we will obey "Every word" that proceeds out of his mouth (Matthew 4:4). Baptism is one of those words. In order to be baptized, certain events must take place: You must give up a lifestyle where sin has dominion, (ruler ship) over you. Sin according to 1 John 3:4, Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression (breaking) of the law. You must be taught "The Word", before you can adhere to God's commandments (judgments\statues). These laws are found in the Holy Bible; beginning with Genesis and ending with Revelation. You must believe what the bible says and finally, you must confess that Jesus is Lord. Once this has been accomplished, you are qualified to be baptized in the name of Jesus.

Another important thing to understand concerning the Baptism brother and sisters. one must be submerge under water fully. Lets take a look in Act: 35-39 Then Philip opened his mouth, and began at the same scripture, and preached unto him Jesus. And as they went on their way, they came unto a certain water: and the eunuch said, See, here is water; what doth hinder me to be baptized? And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God. And he commanded the chariot to stand still: and they went down both into the water, both Philip and the eunuch; and he baptized him. And when they were come up out of the water, the Spirit of the Lord caught away Philip, that the eunuch saw him no more: and he went on his way rejoicing.

"And he said unto them, go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned." (Mark 16:15-16). Baptism is a commandment or requirement for salvation.

Click to expand...

Just for the record, the contents of the above post are regarded as entirely heretical according to orthodox Christian teaching.

The "name" of the Father, Son, and the Holy Spirit is not "Jesus". Jesus is the name of the Son.

We baptize in the name of the Father, Son, and the Holy Spirit because this is Christ's command to His Church.

The Acts of the Apostles record baptism in "Jesus' name" not to speak of formula, but of authority. Christian Baptism is of Christ's authority, to be baptized "in the name of the Lord Jesus" is to be baptized by His authority--and His authority and His command is that His Church baptize in the three-fold name of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. And this is what the Church has done, right from the beginning.

"Jesus-name only" baptism is illicit, because of heretical connotations. E.g. Sabellianism.

-CryptoLutheran

ViaCrucis said:

Just for the record, the contents of the above post are regarded as entirely heretical according to orthodox Christian teaching.

The "name" of the Father, Son, and the Holy Spirit is not "Jesus". Jesus is the name of the Son.

We baptize in the name of the Father, Son, and the Holy Spirit because this is Christ's command to His Church.

The Acts of the Apostles record baptism in "Jesus' name" not to speak of formula, but of authority. Christian Baptism is of Christ's authority, to be baptized "in the name of the Lord Jesus" is to be baptized by His authority--and His authority and His command is that His Church baptize in the three-fold name of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. And this is what the Church has done, right from the beginning.

"Jesus-name only" baptism is illicit, because of heretical connotations. E.g. Sabellianism.

-CryptoLutheran

Click to expand...

The bible speaks of only one way to get eternal salvation. "One Lord, one faith, one baptism" (Ephesians 4:5) But these example of Baptism are after the death of Christ, lets take a look and see.

"But when they believed Phillip preaching the things concerning the Kingdom of God, and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women." hen Simon himself believed also: and when he was baptized, he continued with Philip, and wondered, beholding the miracles and signs which were done. Now when the apostles which were at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent unto them Peter and John: Who, when they were come down, prayed for them, that they might receive the Holy Ghost: (For as yet he was fallen upon none of them: only they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. Then laid they their hands on them, and they received the Holy Ghost. (Acts 8:13-17):

"And it came to pass, that, while Apollo was at Corinth, Paul having passed through the upper coasts came to Ephesus: and finding certain disciples, he said unto them, Have ye received the Holy ghost since ye believed? And they said unto him, "We have not so much as heard whether there be any Holy Ghost.” And he said unto them, "unto what then were ye baptized?" And they said unto John's baptism. Then Paul said, “John verily baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying unto the people, that they should believe on him who should come after him, that is, Jesus Christ.” When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. When Paul had laid hands upon them, the Holy Ghost came on them; and they spake with tongues, and prophesied. And all the men were about twelve." (Acts 19:1-7).

Another example...

"Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ. Now when they heard this, they were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, men and brethren, what shall we do? Then Peter said unto them, "repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost." (Acts1:36-38).

Jesus says in Matthew 18:16 But if he will not hear thee, then take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established. Now they didn't call on the three titles, they call on the name of Jesus and was baptizes.

Dok Bantis said:

Confusion, strife, and discord seem to be all that I find whenever I seriously investigate just about any point of Christian doctrine or belief.

Everyone prays until they discern the correct answer, but everyone's answer contradicts everyone else's. And the stakes of these doctrinal arguments are of ultimate and eternal importance.

Click to expand...

At the end of the day you will do and believe in whichever sect you join. Every group abides by their own teachings and policy procedures in receiving converts.

Dok Bantis said:

I'm not certain how to take your post. If taken at face value, I must object strenuously. I am seeking objective truth. There is one Christ, one Gospel, and one Bible. We must be able to ascertain objective truth from that Bible or all hope is lost.

Click to expand...

Scripture only recognizes one baptism per person per lifetime (Ephesians 4:5-6). You can't "reboot" or "retcon" your baptism, and simply do it again. (Hebrews 6:6). There are other ways to be restored if you have lapsed.

On the other hand baptism requires a form and ritual to follow. Various sects have their own criteria that must be met for your baptism to be recognized as valid when crossing party lines.
For example what authority did the person who baptised you have, to do so? As an example most groups will not recognize a valid baptism if you tell them your husband baptised you while you were showering.

Other considerations are:
In what name were you baptised into?
How was it administered? Sprinkling, pouring, full immersion? How many immersions?
As an example a baptism in the name of the Trinity: Father ,Son and, Holy Spirit follows a valid form, but can still be invalid if done in one immersion only. As an example Oneness Pentecostals will use only one immersion as they recognize Father, Son and Spirit as titles of the same God and not Three distinct persons in one God.

The understanding of baptism within the group you were baptised in plays a role.

Mormons have a different understanding of baptism from Baptists who have a different understanding from Roman Catholics etc

In all apostolic churches a confession of faith must be made prior to entering the waters, this confession on the doctrine of God is intrinsically tied to baptism and can't be seperated from it.

Still other groups have minimum age requirements which can disqualify a baptism you had in a previous group. And still others don't care and allow you to be baptised periodically, as many times as you want. Granted the latter is unscriptural (John 13:8-10)

Ah, and then there are people like me who were bullied by cults posing as churches to be baptized into them...