Should one be fully submerged for Baptism?

excellent post

DrTheophorus said:

The Bible rarely defines how baptism was done. The only clear explanation fo Baptism in the first century Church is in the Didache, or "The Training of the Twelve". Immension is one of several approved methods. There is no Biblical record of which method St. John the Baptist used to baptize Jesus. In fact the earliest record we have of the baptism of Jesus is in pictograph's in the Catacombs from the second century depicting St. John the Baptist pouring water from a pitcher over Jesus' head. Most of the year the Jordan River is very shallow so pouring would seem more likely.

There has been some discussion of the Greek word "Baptizo" which should be understood as wash, in Greek literature it is rarely used to mean immerse of which there are other words more appropriately translated as immersion.

Deus Misereatur

Click to expand...

tecjr said:

I agree that method is not important. And I do know a pastor who has immersed infants (at the parent's requests.) He holds their nose and mouth and moves them very quickly through the water in an arc motion. Never had one even choke a bit--not once.

But, everyone keeps saying Jesus was immersed. I see no evidence of this. Though, even if he were, it is not a matter of salvation whether or not you have gone all the way under or if you had water poured on your head. "In the name of the Father, and the Son, and The Holy Ghost." Those powerful words uttered at baptism are far more powerful than the symbolic amount of water to be used.
all of this, of course is my humble opinion.

Forgive any offense

Click to expand...

There is probably a Christian sect somewhere who believes that you must be baptized in the largest body of water of all, the ocean. You are right, it is the words that are important not the amount of water from a microscopic drop to the largest ocean they are fully baptized.

Deus misereatur

"Baptism" Chapter 3 http://www.familyradio.com/graphical/literature/frame/

How Are We to Apply Water Baptism?

The next question we should face is in regards to the mode of baptism. Should baptism be by sprinkling, by immersion, or by water being poured on?
One would think, given the popular practice of immersion which is utilized by so many churches, that the Bible must clearly teach that immersion is the Biblical mode. But when we search the Bible carefully, we find nothing that speaks of immersion. Nor do we find any examples of believers being immersed. Nor do we find the idea of immersion associated with salvation and the washing away of sins.

What then in the Bible is so suggestive of immersion that many believe the Bible is teaching immersion? You may remember that in Chapter 1, we showed that the Greek word bapto in no way teaches that baptism means immersion. Two citations are especially used to teach immersion. The first is concerned with the baptism of Jesus. Was He immersed in the Jordan River? Did not John the Baptist baptize in the Jordon River because there was much water there? The Bible speaks of the baptism of Jesus in Matthew 3:16:

And Jesus when he was baptized, went up straightway out of the water: and, lo, the heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove, and lighting upon him.


Does this verse teach without question that Jesus went up out of the water, and, therefore, He must have been immersed?
This verse does not speak of immersion. This verse says He went up out of the water. How must we understand this phrase? The Biblical rule is that we are to seek help from the Bible. Doing so, we come to Acts 8:38-39, where the Bible describes the water baptism of the Ethiopian eunuch. We read there:

And he commanded the chariot to stand still: and they went down both into the water, both Philip and the eunuch: and he baptized them. 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.

Notice that verse 39 speaks of coming up out of the water which is the very same phrase that describes Jesus going up out of the

water. What does verse 38 say? It says, "they went down both into the water, both Philip and the eunuch." Whatever action the eunuch took was an exact duplicate to that which Philip took. They both went down into the water. To make sure that we have not misunderstood, the emphasis is added, both Philip and the eunuch. Therefore, if going down into the water implies immersion, then we must conclude that Philip immersed himself at the same time he immersed the eunuch. Such a conclusion, of course, makes no sense. God is simply teaching that there was a body of water, and that Philip and the eunuch both went down to the bank into the water. There they stood ankle deep or knee deep (how deep is altogether unimportant), and Philip baptized the eunuch. Later in our study, we will see that the Bible suggests the mode of baptism, and it will not be immersion.

To further reinforce the teaching that going down into the water does not imply immersion, the next phrase of Acts 8:39 declares, "And when they were come up out of the water." God frequently uses the number three to symbolically emphasize God's purpose. The threefold emphasis, both into the water, both Philip and the eunuch, and they were coming up out of the water, underscores that it is God's purpose that we are not to understand that immersion was the mode of baptism in this historical event. Clearly the language coming up out of the water cannot imply baptism by immersion. Since Jesus also came up out of the water after He was baptized, we must not see an implication of immersion in His baptism.
You may remember that earlier in our study we learned that Jesus had to be ceremonially washed before He could do the work of the High Priest. He was not only the Lamb that was offered, but

He was also the High Priest. Do you recall that the priests were ceremonially washed before they ministered at the altar? Exodus 30:18-21

Thou shalt also make a lavar of brass, and his foot also of brass, to wash withal: and thou shalt put it between the tabernacle of the congregation and the altar, and thou shalt put water therein. For Aaron and his sons shall wash their hands and their feet thereat: When they go into the tabernacle of the congregation, they shall wash with water, that they die not; or when they come near to the altar to minister, to burn offering made by fire unto the LORD: So they shall wash their hands and their feet, that they die not: and it shall be a statute for ever to them, even to him and to his seed throughout their generations.



The priests' hand and feet were washed. That was the washing Jesus had to experience before ministering at the altar of sacrifice. Thus, we would not in any way expect that Jesus was immersed when He was baptized.

Does Romans 6 Teach Immersion?

Another Bible verse that appears to imply immersion is Romans 6:3-4:

Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death? Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the Glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.

Many preachers emphasize that when someone is immersed into the water, he is immersed with all his sins. Then, when his is brought out of the water, his sins are left behind, and he is now free from his sins. This verse is frequently used to support such a teaching.
But, as we learned earlier in this study, these verses are not speaking of water baptism. They are speaking of the washing away of our sins that occurs when we become saved. Burial does not identify with immersion. Burial identifies with death. It is the evidence that death has occurred. We were washed of our sins because Christ in His death took our sins upon Himself. To free Himself from these sins, He had to pay the penalty demanded by the law for the sins. That penalty was not immersion. It was the second death, eternal damnation. The penalty had to be the equivalent of or equal to the punishment for all the sins of everyone for whom He came as Savior. Therefore, it was as if those of us whom He came to save were actually experiencing the second death. We were washed of our sins because we, in principle (Christ was our substitute, our stand-in), experienced the death that Christ endured. Thus, the phrase, "buried with him by baptism into death," teaches that we are washed of our sins because we were completely and perfectly identified with Jesus as He suffered the second death, eternal damnation, on our behalf. The idea of going down into the water with our sins and coming up out of the water without our sins is foreign to the Bible. When God uses the word baptism to signify cleansing from our sins, it is always expressing the idea of washing.


Thus, Romans 6:3-4 is not teaching immersion in any sense. In fact, immersion is never used in the Bible as a synonym for salvation. On the other hand, the word baptism, which means washing, has many symptoms in the Bible which describe salvation. Cleansing, purifying, purging, and washing are some of the synonyms that frequently are used to describe salvation.

What is the Biblical Method of Water Baptism?

If immersion is not taught as a Biblical method of baptism, what else does the Bible offer concerning the Biblical method of baptism? Is it true, as we saw earlier, that the Old Testament ceremonial washings included the washing of hands and feet, the washing of clothes, the bathing of the body, and the sprinkling with water. All of these were Old Testament ceremonies that pointed to the washing away of our sins by the shed blood of the coming Messiah. Is there anything in the Bible that points specifically to New Testament baptism? We have already learned that the baptism of Jesus and the baptism of the Ethiopian eunuch give us no clues concerning the mode of baptism.
But the baptism of the eunuch does give a clue. It is not found in the language describing his physical baptism, but rather, it is found in the verses in the Bible that he was reading. Acts 8:32-33 clearly show that he was reading Isaiah 53, which describes the Messiah who was to come. Philip was brought to explain this passage to the eunuch.
The introduction to Isaiah 53 is in Isaiah 52, particularly beginning with verse 7 and continuing with the language of verses 13-15, which are an integral part of the description of the Messiah who was to come. Note the language of Isaiah 52:13-15:

Behold, my servant shall deal prudently, he shall be exalted and extolled, and be very high. As many were astonied at thee; his visage was so marred more than any man, and his form more than the sons of men: So shall he sprinkle many nations; the kings shall shut their mouths at him: for that which had not been told them shall they see; and that which they had not heard shall they consider.


These verses give the clue as to why the eunuch desired to be baptized and the method by which he was baptized. Verse 15 declares, "So shall he sprinkle many nations…" We can imagine the eunuch's questions concerning this phrase. We can also imagine how Philip answered him using the Scriptures. He would surely have used the same Scriptures that we use as we compare Scripture with Scripture. Ezekiel 36:24-27 promises:

For I will take you from among the heathen, and gather you out of all countries, and will bring you into your own land. Then will I sprinkle clean water upon you, and ye shall be clean: from all your filthiness, and from all your idols, will I cleanse you. A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you: and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you an heart of flesh. And I will put my spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes, and ye shall keep my judgments, and do them.


Notice God's usage of the word "sprinkle." "Then will I sprinkle clean water upon you." The clean water is the Gospel that He applies to our lives when our sins are washed away. When our sins are washed away, God gives us a new spirit. This agrees with Jesus' statement, "Ye must be born again" (John 3:7). When we become saved, our sins are washed away, and we are given a brand new resurrected soul or spirit. Additionally, Ezekiel 36, verse 27, teaches that God's Spirit indwells us, "I will put my spirit within you."

Therefore, the salvation plan which was to involve all the nations of the world is spoken of in Isaiah 52:15 as sprinkling many nations because it means that people from many nations may have sprinkled (washed) with the Gospel so that they would be washed clean of their sins. Because many nations are being spoken of, it definitely is related to the New Testament era after the explosion of the Gospel as recorded in Acts.
When Philip explained this to the Ethiopian eunuch, he, too, wanted the outward sign of salvation which is water baptism. The sign Philip and he had been discussing was sprinkling. Therefore, the implication is very strong that after Philip and the eunuch had both gone into the pool of water, Philip sprinkled water on the eunuch as the baptismal shadow of that which hopefully had occurred in the heart of the eunuch.
A significant passage that relates sprinkling to salvation is Numbers 8, versus 5-7:

And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying, Take the Levites from among the children of Israel, and cleanse them. And thus shalt thou do unto them, to cleanse them: Sprinkle water of purifying upon them, and let them shave all their flesh, and let them wash their clothes, and so make themselves clean.

Verse 11 continues with:

And Aaron shall offer the Levites before the LORD for an offering of the children of Israel, that they may execute the service of the LORD.

Verses 14-18 state:

Thus shalt thou separate the Levites from among the children of Israel: and the Levites shall be mine. And after that shall the Levites go in to do the service of the tabernacle of the congregation: and thou shalt cleanse them, and offer them for an offering. For they are wholly given unto me from among the children of Israel; instead of such as open every womb, even instead of the firstborn of all the children of Israel, have I taken them unto me. For all the firstborn of the children of Israel are mine, both man and beast: on the day that I smote every firstborn in the land of Egypt I sanctified them for myself. And I have taken the Levites for all the firstborn of the children of Israel.

This passage beautifully points to Christ who was typified by the Levites. We who become saved are typified by the firstborn.

Jesus, who was typified by the Levites, was given as an offering on behalf of the firstborn (those whom He came to save). We who are believers have had our sins washed away by Christ giving His life for us. He was washed (sprinkled) by enduring the wrath of God.
Significantly, the ceremony which pointed to spiritual cleansing was sprinkling with water (Numbers 8:7).

Thus, we are definitely directed by God to sprinkling as the New Testament mode of water baptism.

Hope that helps.

Chadsly said:

First of all, babies should not baptized. Baptism is a symbol of being a follower of Jesus Christ not just having parents who happen to believe a certain way. This is way off topic so let's get back to the discussion.

Baptism is a symbol of being a follower of Christ. Yes baptism is to be done by saturating the outside of ones self whether being sprayed with a water hose, dunking, or whatever method. Sprinkling a few drops on someones head is not how God said to do it, but that's not the major emphasis of what Christ asked us to do. he asked us to go and make disciples and then baptize them.

Click to expand...

The baptism being done by John the baptist had nothing to do with being a follower of christ. it was a baptism of repentence.In Acts Jesus says for john baptised with water but in a few days you will be baptised with the holy spirit.
I find it interesting that Jesus did not empasise water baptism here. I wonder if that should mean anything to us today?

TheDag said:

The baptism being done by John the baptist had nothing to do with being a follower of christ. it was a baptism of repentence.In Acts Jesus says for john baptised with water but in a few days you will be baptised with the holy spirit.
I find it interesting that Jesus did not empasise water baptism here. I wonder if that should mean anything to us today?

Click to expand...

What about these verses:

John 3:26
And they came to John and said to him, "Rabbi, He who was with you beyond the Jordan, to whom you have testified, behold, He is baptizing and all are coming to Him."

John 4:1-2
Therefore when the Lord knew that the Pharisees had heard that Jesus was making and baptizing more disciples than John (although Jesus Himself was not baptizing, but His disciples were),​

Water baptism seems to be part of Christ's ministry.

You need to be more specific in your question.

PaladinValer said:

Chadsly, then how come 1st century Christians did otherwise and thought otherwise?

Click to expand...

***just sitting back with my popcorn watching the fur fly, again***

The biggest problem I see on this thread is that there are too many looking to a man (no matter how religious) for the answers instead of just reading the Scriptures.

No Scriptures during the first Baptisms...

That means Scripture isn't the only guide.

LOL That's because Christ gave them the example.

PaladinValer said:

No Scriptures during the first Baptisms...

That means Scripture isn't the only guide.

Click to expand...

Jig said:

John baptised indeed for repentence....but for who? God! And who is Jesus? God! And who dead to forgives sins that have been repented? Jesus! Plus, John was sent by God, in the spirit of Elijah, to pave the path for followers of Christ. So wouldn't it be safe to say, even his (John's) baptism had everything to do with being a follower of Christ.

Click to expand...

NO!!!

You've managed to COMPLETELY screw that up. John's baptism had NOTHING to do with being a follower of Christ.

Whether or not John baptized "into repentance" (even if it was Gods repentance) is IRRELEVANT. Paul makes it CRYSTAL CLEAR in Acts 19, that John's baptism didn't satisfy insofar as anyone being considered a follower of Christ.

Jig said:

John baptised indeed for repentence....but for who? God! And who is Jesus? God! And who dead to forgives sins that have been repented? Jesus! Plus, John was sent by God, in the spirit of Elijah, to pave the path for followers of Christ. So wouldn't it be safe to say, even his (John's) baptism had everything to do with being a follower of Christ.

Click to expand...

I would say the focus would have been on God the father not God the son. Yes Jesus was the one who died to pay the price for our sins as it was his fathers will and many things he did was so the father should be glorified. Yes John was part of preparing the way for Jesus but it was for the fathers glory.

Salvatore Gonzales said:

It's not the amount of water used or how deep you go in the pond that will
help you follow the Spirit.

Click to expand...

I might as well give the citations for my earlier statement:

Mark 1:1-8 - 1 The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God;
2 As it is written in the prophets, Behold, I send my messenger before thy
face, which shall prepare thy way before thee. 3 The voice of one crying in
the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make his paths straight.
4 John did baptize in the wilderness, and preach the baptism of repentance
for the remission of sins. 5 And there went out unto him all the land of
Judaea, and they of Jerusalem, and were all baptized of him in the river of
Jordan, confessing their sins. 6 And John was clothed with camel's hair, and
with a girdle of a skin about his loins; and he did eat locusts and wild honey;
7 And preached, saying, There cometh one mightier than I after me, the
latchet of whose shoes I am not worthy to stoop down and unloose. 8 I
indeed have baptized you with water: but he shall baptize you with the Holy
Ghost.

Acts 19:1-7 - 1 And it came to pass, that, while Apollos was at Corinth, Paul
having passed through the upper coasts came to Ephesus: and finding
certain disciples, 2 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. 3 And he said unto them, Unto what then were ye
baptized? And they said, Unto John's baptism. 4 Then said Paul, John verily
baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying unto the people, that they
should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus.
5 When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.
6 And when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Ghost came on
them; and they spake with tongues, and prophesied. 7 And all the men were
about twelve.



It's not about the water.....

It's not about the food you eat....

KEPLER said:

Actually Catholic Dude, the Orthodox baptize infants, and they IMMERSE them, not once, but three times!! (I've been to two EO baptisms, so I've seen it myself...and let me tell you, it makes for one unhappy baby! )

Click to expand...

That's true, but we don't do it face-first like (I think) adults are baptized, for obvious reasons.

Stinker said:

IgnatiusOfAntioch said:

There is a writing from the first century church, the didache, which may have been written around 60 A.D. before even the Gospels. It is the teaching of the Apostles for things such as order of worship and how the baptism and other things were done.

Here is the excerpt concerning baptism:
"Chapter 7. Concerning Baptism. And concerning baptism, baptize this way: Having first said all these things, baptize into the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, in living water. But if you have no living water, baptize into other water; and if you cannot do so in cold water, do so in warm. But if you have neither, pour out water three times upon the head into the name of Father and Son and Holy Spirit."

It refers to "living water" which would be running water, such as a stream or river. It details the legitimate methods in order of most to least preferred. So there was some latitude based on what was available.

Certainly the martyrs about to be fed to the lions would want to baptised new converts with them and would have little more than a pitcher of water with which to baptize many.

Click to expand...

Actually the scholars say the Didache may have been written 120 A.D-150 A.D.

Click to expand...

Actually, many scholars believe it to be prior to the Gospels, but so what?
It is the teaching of the early church on the means of performing Baptism.

Stinker said:

Many pseudo scholars would have us also believe that such inferior writings such as the Gospel of Thomas, Gospel of Mary, etc., were written before the earliest New Testament writings.

Click to expand...

Those you mentioned have been proven to be inauthentic documents. Are you comparing these to the Didache?

Actually Catholic Dude, the Orthodox baptize infants, and they IMMERSE them, not once, but three times!! (I've been to two EO baptisms, so I've seen it myself...and let me tell you, it makes for one unhappy baby! )

Click to expand...

My parents tell me I raised quite a fuss during my baptism. Must be something about babies not liking being immersed in water.

Is baptism necessary for salvation? Is it necessary to be water baptized after one's profession of faith before one can receive the gift of forgiveness and new life through regeneration? Or is baptism a proper act of obedience after one is saved? Does it really matter how a person is baptised either by emersion or sprinkling? Or does God look at the heart issue and obedience!

whitedove7 said:

Is baptism necessary for salvation?

Click to expand...

Yes.