Featured Baptism method and meaning across denominations

Oh don't play dumb.

 

In I Corinthians, Paul says he thanks God that he baptized no one but…… (Gaius and Crispus.. I think, no I’m not looking it up, you can)

if baptism was salvific shouldn’t he brag about all that he baptized since it would have saved them.

 

How about the instructions on HOW to do it? If I wanted to build a replica of the ark that Noah built, or the one that Moses built, I can find plain, precise, detailed instructions on how to build those in the scriptures. If I wanted to perform (God forbid) a ceremonial sacrifice or oblation, I can find plain, precise, detailed instructions on how to do it. The scriptures contain many examples of plain, precise, detailed instructions that were given. Where are instructions given in the scriptures on how to correctly perform the rite of water baptism?

 

The Greek word "baptismo", from which we get 'baptize', means "to immerse". (Not necessarily to baptize, but it proves correct baptism is by immersion.)
Please show us an example in Scripture where a baby, or any non-believer, WAS baptized.

 

Maybe they were all over 60 and barren?

see how easy it is to argue from silence

 

Not playing. Serious question. Is this what you think 'sozo' in those passages mean? (i.e., saved = heaven bound):

16 He that believeth and is baptized shall go to heaven; but he that disbelieveth shall be condemned. Mk 16

38 And Peter said unto them, Repent ye, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ unto the remission of your sins; and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.
39 For to you is the promise, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call unto him.
40 And with many other words he testified, and exhorted them, saying, send yourselves to heaven from this crooked generation. Acts 2

20 that aforetime were disobedient, when the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls, were sent to heaven through water:
21 which also after a true likeness doth now send you to heaven, even baptism, not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the interrogation of a good conscience toward God, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ; 1 Pet 3

 

Making some assumptions huh?

 

Yet when the New Testament talks about water baptism, it is immersion. That is what we go by, that is the model, that is the mandate.

 

The water in jn3. is not water baptism.
it is the water of separation.num19.
the children Jesus spoke of were believers mt.18:6

 

Thanks for replying Cathode. My thoughts on John's Baptism in Mt 3:

"Baptize (“baptisei”) with the Holy Spirit and fire" are opposites (he will gather his wheat into the garner, but the chaff he will burn), the first was being 'clothed with power from on high' and the latter signifying vengeance poured out from on high. Wind, water, are indeed common metaphors or symbols for the Spirit. Fire, on the other hand, is by far and away primarily the metaphor/symbol most commonly used for the wrath of God.

7 But when he saw many of the Pharisees and Sadducees coming to his baptism, he said unto them, Ye offspring of vipers, who warned you to flee from the wrath to come?
8 Bring forth therefore fruit worthy of repentance:
9 and think not to say within yourselves, We have Abraham to our father: for I say unto you, that God is able of these stones to raise up children unto Abraham.
10 And even now the axe lieth at the root of the trees: every tree therefore that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire.
11 I indeed baptize you in water unto repentance: but he that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you in the Holy Spirit and in fire:
12 whose fan is in his hand, and he will thoroughly cleanse his threshing-floor; and he will gather his wheat into the garner, but the chaff he will burn up with unquenchable fire. Mt 3

A closer scrutiny of the context of Mt 3 should show that fire is NOT being used as a metaphor/symbol for the Spirit, but is in reference to WRATH. This is the prophet John the Baptist speaking to his fellow countrymen, to whom he was sent.

Speaking to the Pharisees and Sadducees, “Who warned you to flee from the wrath to come?” John was referring to that wrath that was to come upon 'that generation' of Jews (“even now the axe lieth at the root of the trees” and, “the chaff he will burn up with unquenchable fire”).

“ ..he shall baptize you in the Holy Spirit and in fire...”. And that's exactly what Christ did to that generation of Jews that He walked among and preached to. To those that received Him, He gave the Spirit. Those that rejected Him had only that certain expectation of wrath to come.

Behold then the goodness and severity of God.....Ro 11:22

 

???

Water in Jn 3 signifies something, what is it?

 

The water of separation from numbers 19:9....ezk36.25-27

Then Jesus spoke of num.21 :8,9

 

5 Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except one be born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God! Jn 3

So, to enter the kingdom of God one must keep ashes of a burnt heifer in a jar AND be born of the Spirit.

Got it.

9 And a man that is clean shall gather up the ashes of the heifer, and lay them up without the camp in a clean place, and it shall be kept for the congregation of the children of Israel for a water of separation: it is a purification for sin.

Maybe you could explain it?

 

Good question Kyred....but the writer to Hebrews 9 beat me to it....read the whole chapter as He explains how Jesus is the fulfillment as our great High priest.
You could even read from chapter 7-10
Nicodemus was familiar with this, as well as ezk 36.
Nicodemus knew nothing of Christian baptism, but he knew about the water of separation...it is an atonement for sin.

 

The didache, (a non canonical early writing) says that at the end of the 1st century they were only baptizing by immersion.

so back to canonical writings: where was an infant baptized in the NT?

 

Just my opinion, but I believe they do not need to "get saved". I believe they are already saved. I believe God has mercy on the innocent and graciously saves them -- no ritual needed or required.

 

Actually, the Didache did allow for pouring, as a secondary mode when immersion could not be done.

"Now concerning baptism, baptize as follows: after you have reviewed all these things, baptize in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit in running water. But if you have no running water, then baptize in some other water; and if you are not able to baptize in cold water, then do so in warm. But if you have neither, then pour water on the head three times in the name of the Father and Son and Holy Spirit..."

But, as you point out, the Didache is not canonical.

I think it is significant that the Eastern Church will baptize only by immersion, even baptizing babies that way. The Eastern, Greek church knew/knows what the original meaning and mode of baptism was.

 

Except they are not innocent.

 

That is also different than sprinkling babies.