The following article was submitted without documentation. The name of the newspaper in which it appeared is not given, nor is the date of publication provided. The above title is given under the heading of “View from the Pew,” and the writer was LeRoy Yount. After quoting the text of 1 Peter 3:20-21 from the King James Version, Mr. Yount then comments:
How anyone can get immersion out of this statement is strange indeed. The antediluvians (wicked people) were the ones drowned or immersed. The “eight souls were saved” by keeping out of the water. If they got any water on them at all it must have rained on them. The world was wicked and defiled, and steeped in sin. The antediluvians would not obey the Lord and were drowned. Noah and his family came into the ark and were saved (had a clear conscience).
Apparently, Mr. Yount’s objection is that baptism means immersion–not that baptism is necessary. The fact that “baptism doth also now save us” cannot be disputed, and the writer does not try. Would he agree, then, that baptism is essential to salvation, that one cannot be saved without being baptized? We would really like to hear a reply on that point.
If he seeks to remove the concept of immersion from baptism, he fails on four counts. First of all, the word translated “baptism” literally means “immersion.” Any Greek lexicon will so define the word. No one who champions sprinkling even challenges this fact any more. Second, the Bible gives us an example of baptism, and the one being baptized is immersed. Both Philip and the eunuch go down into the water; Philip baptizes him; both Philip and the eunuch come up out of the water (Acts 8:35-39). There is no example of either sprinkling or pouring water on somebody’s forehead in the Scriptures. Third, baptism is described as a burial in water (Rom. 6:3-5). When people die, they are completely covered–perhaps in a tomb or vault or under the ground. No one, however, just sprinkles dirt on a loved one and then walks away, leaving the body exposed. In immersion one is buried and raised up.
Mr. Yount is correct in observing that those under the water were killed and those who remained dry were saved. But he apparently does not understand the words type and antitype. The words translated “like figure” are from the Greek word antitupos. The flood is the “type”; baptism is the “antitype.” These are mirror images. They are the same, yet opposites. The type on a press is backwards, but when it is printed, it is legible. In the flood those under the water were drowned; in baptism those under the water are saved. It is the Holy Spirit, however, who chose to describe both events as being saved by water.
Every way the subject can possibly be examined, without exception, baptism is by immersion. John did not need “much water” to sprinkle people (John 3:23). Historically, it was more than 200 years after the establishment of the church that anyone tried something other than immersion for baptism. The writer continues:
If we repent and do like Noah and his family–come into the ark–the Holy Ghost gives witness to a clear conscience that we are saved.
Certainly, we all need to follow Noah’s example. Genesis 6:22 tells us: “Thus did Noah; according to all that God commanded him, so did he.” Has Mr. Yount been immersed for the remission of his sins, as the inspired apostle Peter commanded on the day of Pentecost (Acts 2:38)? No, he seeks to get out from under the command for reasons known best to him.
Those three thousand who were immersed (Acts 2:41) entered into the ark; Acts 2:47 says that “the Lord added to the church daily those who were being saved.” Being in the body of Christ, the church (Eph. 1:22-23) certainly can be described as a place as safe as the ark (John 10:27:29). [The writer might explain whether he is a member of the Lord’s church or a man-made institution.]
Mr. Yount sees the word conscience in 1 Peter 3:21 and finds the word sprinkled along with it in Hebrews 10:22 and thinks he has found proof that baptism is sprinkling. Yet the verse says our hearts are sprinkled “and our bodies are washed with pure water.” Water is not sprinkled on anyone’s heart; the writer is using a metaphor. The body, however, is washed with water when a person is baptized.
In his final paragraph, Mr. Yount primarily repeats what he has already said. He affirms that the phrase, were saved by water, means that Noah and his family were saved “by means of an ark being built that floated on water.” Well, of course we all know that these eight souls were saved by being inside the ark and out of the water, but the writer would do well to ask himself why the Holy Spirit chose to word it the way He did.
He could have said it the way Mr. Yount did, but then the point expressed in the antitype would be lost. It is only when God says that both Noah’s family and those baptized are “saved by water” that we can fully understand the type and antitype involved. Otherwise we see no correspondence between the two in this figure of speech. Certainly, sprinkling or pouring water on someone cannot correspond to the flood; only immersion can. If we truly love God, we ought to obey him readily and heartily–without quibble.