Why we dont Baptize

[Salty]

Found this from a Reformed Presb
How would you reply to this discussion?


Click here for link: Why we dont baptize by Immersion

 

[AustinC]

Found this from a Reformed Presb
How would you reply to this discussion?


Click here for link: Why we dont baptize

The author misses the point. He focuses on the mode of water baptism, but neglects the function of water baptism.
He touches on Romans 6, which never refers to water baptism, but instead references the Holy Spirit's immersion of the redeemed sinner into Christ Jesus so that the redeemed person is made holy and righteous in Christ.
Water baptism is always symbolic of the effectual baptism performed by the Holy Spirit at the moment of redemption.
Jesus command to baptize is not as a supernatural means of salvation, but as a symbolic expression of union into himself. In that light, I couldn't care less what mode of water baptism is used.

Another thing I reject is the use of the term sacrament. Instead I use the term, ordinance, as both water baptism and communion are ordinances. Sacrament, implies an effectual grace given to a person by performing a ceremony. I find this term leads to false doctrines that spread legalism and ultimately reject grace altogether. So, I would tell this writer to no longer use sacrament as a term.

 

[Jerome]

Found this from a Reformed Presb

Oh brother!

He says:

"the Gospels, Acts, and Epistles...do not speak of baptism...in terms of immersion. It is always either sprinkling or pouring"

But of course here's the clincher:

"Our Confession speaks thus: 'Dipping of the person into the water is not necessary; but Baptism is rightly administered by pouring or sprinkling water upon the person'"

 

[rlvaughn]

Not a full reply, but just a couple of things that jumped out at me.

“Yet, it is wholly reasonable, and faithful to the text’s grammar, that they were ankle deep in a recent desert wadi (rain stream), from which Philip placed water on the professing eunuch, and from which they returned to the road.”

“Jesus came up from ankle deep water situated on lower ground.”

I might be inclined to take his argument a little more seriously if any of these churches actually went into ankle deep water to baptize.

Don’t worry, though, if you should ever want to join a Reformed Presbyterian they will receive you on your immersion, despite the fact they believe “that sprinkling or pouring are the biblical modes of administering Jesus’ sacrament of Baptism.”

“...we, notwithstanding, do receive into membership persons who have been baptized by immersion.”

 

[tyndale1946]

Oh brother!

He says:

"the Gospels, Acts, and Epistles...do not speak of baptism...in terms of immersion. It is always either sprinkling or pouring"

But of course here's the clincher:

"Our Confession speaks thus: 'Dipping of the person into the water is not necessary; but Baptism is rightly administered by pouring or sprinkling water upon the person'"

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:

3:17 And lo a voice from heaven, saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.

If he came straightway out of the water, his whole body had to be immersed (under), the water!... DUH!... Brother Glen

Btw... They say we have found the Messiah!... We are to baptized in the same mode, to be buried under the water, seems to me they are still looking for the Messiah!... Ya think?

 

[Jerome]

Even their guy Calvin admitted in his Commentary:

[John 3:22 After these things came Jesus and his disciples into the land of Judaea; and there he tarried with them, and baptized.
John 3:23 And John also was baptizing in Aenon near to Salim, because there was much water there: and they came, and were baptized.]

John Calvin:
"The Evangelist says that there were many waters there....From these words, we may infer John and Christ administered baptism by plunging the whole body beneath the water"

 

[Martin Marprelate]

The simplest way to understand the meaning of a word is to study its usage in as many texts as possible. Fortunately we are saved the very hard work that such a study would involve because a 19th Century scholar, T.J.Conant, in his book, The meaning and use of Baptizein (Wakeman Classic Reprints. ISBN 1-870855-31-0 ), has given every single usage of Baptizo in Classical or Koine Greek, and as we study the word, we can see that it always and invariably means, ‘To dip’, ‘submerge’ or ‘to immerse.’ Sometimes the usage is figurative, as when people are said to be ‘overwhelmed’ by grief, drink, debt or desire. Very occasionally, ‘sprinkle’ is a possible alternative translation, but never once is it required by the context.

It may be helpful to see how some of the Church fathers write about baptism. This is not out of respect for their theological understanding, which was variable to say the least. Rather, we look to them to see what Greek-speakers in the early centuries A.D. understood baptizo to mean, and taught their congregations.

1. Cyril of Jerusalem, Instruction III, on Baptism XII. ‘For as Jesus assuming the sins of the world died, that having slain sin He might raise you up to righteousness; so also you, going down into the water, and in a manner buried in the waters as He in the rock, are raised again, walking in newness of life.’

2. John Chrysostom. Comment on 1Cor. Discourse XL. I. ‘For to be baptized, and to sink down, then to emerge, is a symbol of the descent into the underworld, and of the descent from there. Therefore Paul calls baptism, the burial, saying, “we were buried therefore, with Him by the baptism into death.”‘

3. Athanasius. Discourse on the Holy Passover, 5. ‘In these benefits you were baptized, O newly-enlightened; the initiation into the grace……has become to you an earnest of resurrection; you have the baptism as a surety of the abode in heaven. You imitated, in the sinking down, the burial of the Master; but you rose again from there, before works, witnessing the works of the resurrection.’

4. Gregory of Nazianus. Discourse XL, on the holy Baptism. ‘Let us therefore be buried with Christ by the baptism, that we mayalso rise with Him. Let us go down with Him, that we may also be exalted with Him; let us come up with Him, that we may also be glorified with Him.’

In every single example that I can find (and there are plenty of others), the Church Fathers understand Baptizo to mean immersion. They wrote in Greek; they ought to know what a Greek word means.

 

[Ziggy]

Even the Greek Orthodox (who ought to understand the meaning of βαπτιζειν) baptize infants by immersion.

 

[rlvaughn]

The simplest way to understand the meaning of a word is to study its usage in as many texts as possible. Fortunately we are saved the very hard work that such a study would involve because a 19th Century scholar, T.J.Conant, in his book, The meaning and use of Baptizein (Wakeman Classic Reprints. ISBN 1-870855-31-0 )...

Very good book that ought to be in the hands of every immersing Christian.

It may be helpful to see how some of the Church fathers write about baptism. This is not out of respect for their theological understanding, which was variable to say the least. Rather, we look to them to see what Greek-speakers in the early centuries A.D. understood baptizo to mean, and taught their congregations.

I agree. Tertullian is an early writer (lived ca. AD 155-240). Though I won't vouch for all his theology, he knew both the language and the current practice. Speaking of baptism, he wrote that "we are plunged in water." Hard to find any sprinkling or pouring in that.

 

[atpollard]

How would you reply to this discussion?

It COULD have been a lot of things, but the Greek word “baptizo” means “to plunge under the water”. There is a Greek word for “sprinkle”, but that word was not used. I have to think that the writers had a reason for choosing the word they chose.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

It COULD have been a lot of things, but the Greek word “baptizo” means “to plunge under the water”. There is a Greek word for “sprinkle”, but that word was not used. I have to think that the writers had a reason for choosing the word they chose.

Yep! Those who are unfamiliar with Greek may not realize that, Bible versions notwithstanding, people in the NT are baptized ‘in’ water (Gk. En hudati) and ‘in’ the Holy Spirit (Gk. En hagio pneumati). It is amusing that our Bible translators admit that in Matt 3:6, people were baptized ‘in’ the Jordan (Gk. En to Iordane) but not that they were baptized ‘in’ water in v11. The Greek construction is identical. Now someone will say that En can sometimes mean ‘with.’ So it can, but according to Young’s Analytical Concordance, it is translated ‘in’ 1863 times and ‘with’ 139 times. Its usual and natural meaning is therefore ‘in’ and so it should be translated unless there is a particularly good reason. Moreover in v16, our Lord came up (Gk. Anabaino, ‘to emerge,’ ‘arise’ or ‘ascend’) from the water (Gk. Apo to hudati) and in Acts 8:39, Philip and the eunuch came up ‘out of the water’ (Gk. Ek to hudati), suggesting, at the very least, they had been in the water.

It should also be added that no one in Scripture is ever sprinkled ‘in water,’ en hudati. In the Septuagint version of Ezek 36:25, the Greek reads ‘Rano eph’umas katharon hudor,’ literally, ‘I will sprinkle clean water upon you’ (cf. also Exod 29:21; Lev 6:27; 16:14 ). Never in Greek literature, to the best of my knowledge, is water ever baptized ‘upon’ anyone.

 

[Marooncat79]

John 3:23 John was baptizing ... “because there was much water there”. Doesnt take much to pour, or sprinkle, but dunking is diff in that aspect.

Now the ramifications

1. What about in deserts where there is no water? Is dunking or sprinkling ok?

2. What do you do if there is no place to dunk people?

 

[37818]

Each argument would need to be addressed. First off, the believer's immersion is not any kind of sacrament. And the notion of a sacrament is not New Testament Christianity, it is something else.

 

[tyndale1946]

Our pastor of the Old Line Sovereign Grace Primitive Baptist church I grew up in, in San Diego, California, was baptized in the Pacific Ocean... Is that enough water?... Brother Glen

 

[Reformed]

Found this from a Reformed Presb
How would you reply to this discussion?


Click here for link: Why we dont baptize

I think the title of your OP should reflect the title of the blog post, "Why We Don't Immerse."

 

[Salty]

I think the title of your OP should reflect the title of the blog post, "Why We Don't Immerse."

Yes, you are correct - Not sure what I was thinking

 

[37818]

[

Yes, you are correct - Not sure what I was thinking

You'er a Baptist. If they do not immerse, they do not Baptize.

 

[church mouse guy]

Presbyterians actually just dry clean.

 

[Yeshua1]

The simplest way to understand the meaning of a word is to study its usage in as many texts as possible. Fortunately we are saved the very hard work that such a study would involve because a 19th Century scholar, T.J.Conant, in his book, The meaning and use of Baptizein (Wakeman Classic Reprints. ISBN 1-870855-31-0 ), has given every single usage of Baptizo in Classical or Koine Greek, and as we study the word, we can see that it always and invariably means, ‘To dip’, ‘submerge’ or ‘to immerse.’ Sometimes the usage is figurative, as when people are said to be ‘overwhelmed’ by grief, drink, debt or desire. Very occasionally, ‘sprinkle’ is a possible alternative translation, but never once is it required by the context.

It may be helpful to see how some of the Church fathers write about baptism. This is not out of respect for their theological understanding, which was variable to say the least. Rather, we look to them to see what Greek-speakers in the early centuries A.D. understood baptizo to mean, and taught their congregations.

1. Cyril of Jerusalem, Instruction III, on Baptism XII. ‘For as Jesus assuming the sins of the world died, that having slain sin He might raise you up to righteousness; so also you, going down into the water, and in a manner buried in the waters as He in the rock, are raised again, walking in newness of life.’

2. John Chrysostom. Comment on 1Cor. Discourse XL. I. ‘For to be baptized, and to sink down, then to emerge, is a symbol of the descent into the underworld, and of the descent from there. Therefore Paul calls baptism, the burial, saying, “we were buried therefore, with Him by the baptism into death.”‘

3. Athanasius. Discourse on the Holy Passover, 5. ‘In these benefits you were baptized, O newly-enlightened; the initiation into the grace……has become to you an earnest of resurrection; you have the baptism as a surety of the abode in heaven. You imitated, in the sinking down, the burial of the Master; but you rose again from there, before works, witnessing the works of the resurrection.’

4. Gregory of Nazianus. Discourse XL, on the holy Baptism. ‘Let us therefore be buried with Christ by the baptism, that we mayalso rise with Him. Let us go down with Him, that we may also be exalted with Him; let us come up with Him, that we may also be glorified with Him.’

In every single example that I can find (and there are plenty of others), the Church Fathers understand Baptizo to mean immersion. They wrote in Greek; they ought to know what a Greek word means.

I was very surprised that the founder of one stream of Reformed thought ,Calvin himself, saw it as immersion!

 

[Yeshua1]

The author misses the point. He focuses on the mode of water baptism, but neglects the function of water baptism.
He touches on Romans 6, which never refers to water baptism, but instead references the Holy Spirit's immersion of the redeemed sinner into Christ Jesus so that the redeemed person is made holy and righteous in Christ.
Water baptism is always symbolic of the effectual baptism performed by the Holy Spirit at the moment of redemption.
Jesus command to baptize is not as a supernatural means of salvation, but as a symbolic expression of union into himself. In that light, I couldn't care less what mode of water baptism is used.

Another thing I reject is the use of the term sacrament. Instead I use the term, ordinance, as both water baptism and communion are ordinances. Sacrament, implies an effectual grace given to a person by performing a ceremony. I find this term leads to false doctrines that spread legalism and ultimately reject grace altogether. So, I would tell this writer to no longer use sacrament as a term.

That is why many see it as they do, as they read back into the text "must mean water baptism", while we read i as refering to Baptized by Holy Spirit into Jesus and His Body.... The water baptism symbolic of that already having happened....