To immerse or not to immerse? That is indeed an important question. No matter what position a person takes concerning this aspect of salvation, he is definitely going to upset someone. There is so much debate concerning baptism that it would take an entire book to explain all the different ideas that have been debated on this topic. Since it is such a lengthy topic, this article will only concern the mode of baptism, its definition, its history, the way it was practiced in the first century, and finally how it was practiced after the first century.
What Does βαπτιζω Mean?
The word baptize is not a word that was translated from the Greek New Testament; it was transliterated. For example, the Greek word ‘υιος is our word for son; so that is how we translate it; other words, such as βαπτιζω, were not translated into English, they were transliterated; that is, they took the letters of the English alphabet and substituted them for the corresponding Greek letters, giving us the word baptize. But if they had simply translated it into an English word, which word would they have picked? Well, it depends on the context and the variation of the word itself.
This word can be used in reference to clothes being dyed a certain color (Kittel 1:529), a ship sinking, or a person drowning. It can also be used figuratively to describe bringing a city to the border of destruction, to “go under” or “to sink” into sleep, intoxication, or impotence; or to be “overwhelmed” by faults, desires, sicknesses, or magical arts (Kittel 1:530). If it is used in a literal sense, involving an individual or item, it refers to the subject being overwhelmed by a particular liquid, usually water. If it is used in a figurative sense it refers to a person being overwhelmed by a particular foe, vice, or sickness.
Now the important question is, how was it used in reference to people coming to God? Consider its history.
Proselyte Baptism
Religious washings are not unique to Christianity. Washings of many kinds have been in practice before and after the establishment of Christianity. But to understand how this Christian washing is implemented, one must start by understanding the baptism of Judaism that was in practice 2000 years ago.
If a Gentile desired to dedicate themselves to God, by submitting their life to the teachings of Moses, they were to first be immersed. This seems to be a practice developed after the close of the Old Testament and before the preaching of John the Immerser. If a man wished to become a Jew, he would be circumcised; after he healed from the procedure, he would strip off his clothes to be baptized. This act would require the presence of a Rabbi, and he would recite heavy and light commands of the Law. The candidate, at the hearing of these laws, plunged himself entirely in the water and then would come up from the water. After he came out of the water, he would then be seen as a newborn child, an Israelite in all things! However, the procedure for women would be slightly different. They clearly would be not circumcised, and they would be attended by those of their same sex, with the Rabbi waiting outside (ISBE 1:386).
This was more than an act of washing; it was an act of dedication to God (Flemington 348). The individual was now seen as an infant who was obligated to keep the Torah (Kittel 1:536). This idea of immersion seems to have been so common that there are comments recorded from both Rabbi Shammai and Rabbi Hillel in the Mishnah.
One who became a proselyte on the eve of Passover: Beth Shammai says: he may immerse himself and eat his Passover sacrifice in the evening. But Beth Hillel says: one who separates himself from uncircumcision is as one who separates himself from the grave (Mishnah Eduyot 5:2).
It is plain to see that immersion was the accepted form of proselyte baptism.
The Baptism of John and Jesus
When John the Immerser came on the scene, he baptized for the coming of the kingdom (i.e., the church) (Matt. 3:2). For one to be admitted to this baptism, he had to confess and repent of his sins. He then received forgiveness of his sins (Luke 3:3). How was this baptism administered? Some suggested that since it was not specified, John perhaps brought them out to the water and simply poured water on their head, as is depicted in many paintings and statues today. But first, the customary baptism of that day was immersion; second, the word here is βαπτιζω, which in the Jewish context, refers to a person, item, or body part being immersed or dipped. Since John was baptizing people, it is clear they were being immersed.
Third, if John was doing something other than immersing his followers, there would have to be a different Greek word used to describe the act of pouring and sprinkling, but only βαπτιζω is used. Fourth, historically speaking, immersion is the norm, and only years later would a new model be introduced.
Another thing to consider is John’s need for “much” water. John the Apostle writes, “John also was baptizing in Aenon near Salim, because there was much water there; and people were coming and were being baptized” (John 3:23, NAS). If sprinkling or pouring were fair alternatives, John’s need for much water would have been superfluous.
In reference to the baptism authorized by Jesus, beginning on the Day of Pentecost, the only thing that made itself distinct (in reference to its mode) was the authority by which it was done (Matt. 28:19; Acts 19:5). There is no authoritative command given which authorizes anything besides immersion.
Changes Introduced
Historical records indicate that immersion was the common practice in the early church. The earliest document that suggests a person could be saved without immersion comes from the Didache (an early 2nd century document), which suggests that under extreme circumstances, in which immersion was impossible, a person could have water poured on their head three
times (Didache 7). However, there is no record that this was practiced until the 3rd century when a certain man named Novetus (Novatian), though extremely ill, sought to be baptized; thus, they poured water upon him (Shackleford 43).
Affusion (pouring) was confined to extreme cases until the late 9th century. This was sometimes referred
to as clinical baptism. Eventually it was declared by
the council of Ravenna in 1311 that sprinkling and
pouring were acceptable forms (Shackleford 44).
Christianity Today
Are we still required to practice immersion? Is this what was commanded by Jesus? Yes (Mark 16:16). Is this what was practiced by the disciples of Jesus? Yes (Acts 2:41; cf. Acts 8:35-39). Do we have any authority to sprinkle or pour? No. The reason people are drawn to the church of Christ is that it teaches Apostolic Christianity—the theology and practice of the church established by Jesus Christ. The church teaches the basic principles of speaking where the Word speaks and being silent where it is silent (Deut. 4:2). As Paul commanded all Christians, we should not go beyond that which was written (1 Cor. 4:6).
If Jesus had commanded us to take a bath, will He only be satisfied if we choose to wash our hands? No, I can’t say He will. If one wishes to be obedient to the teachings of Christ one must submit to immersion. Of course, there are still many objections made to immersion, often due to the unwillingness to criticize the current practices of their own church.
Common Arguments Against Immersion
- The Didache approved pouring; therefore, immersion is not necessary. Just because a noninspired source says something, it does not make it true. People only cite the Didache when it is convenient, without desiring to practice its other teachings. Most who support its teachings on “pouring” will not support its teachings on church hierarchy or church discipline (Didache 15). Some of the most unorthodox writings appeared soon after the New Testament was completed. Just because it’s from the early church, does that make it reliable? No, of course not. Unless any teaching can be found in the Scriptures, it cannot be substantiated.
- The church never had any defined formula of baptism. This doesn’t really make sense, since it is like pulling teeth to get away from immersion. Everett Ferguson points out that non-immersive “baptism” was only confined to emergencies for the first 900 years of the church’s existence (Shackleford 44).
- Certain scenarios in Scripture would have made it impossible to immerse, such as the case of the 3,000 saved on the day of Pentecost and the Philippian jailer. This is preposterous. There were multiple pools in Jerusalem such as the pool of Bethesda (John 5:2) and the pool of Siloam (John 9:7), not to mention all the ceremonial pools in private residences that would have been present. And in reference to the jailer, why wouldn’t there be enough water for baptism? It seems that some assume he was baptized in the jail. But why would that be necessary? We know that he left the prison. Thus, he and his whole family were baptized (Acts 16:33-34). Any pond or river could have been available. The jailer was not confined to the jail. Besides, he trusted Paul and Silas; they could have already escaped if that was their intention.
- Baptizo does not always mean “immersion”; therefore, a person does not have to be immersed. It is true that baptizo does not always mean “immerse.” But it depends on the subject and the context. For example, when used in a figurative sense, its meaning may vary. But it still carries with it the idea of something being overwhelmed by something positive or negative. But the baptism of an individual is not something figurative; it’s a literal action, which was administered through immersion. Words always change the meaning, depending on whether or not they are used figuratively or literally.
These arguments are not substantial in any way, nor do they respect the Scriptures, as they ought. The best approach is always to ask, “What saith the Scriptures?”
Works Cited
Flemington, W. F. “Baptism.” The Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible. Nashville, TN: Abingdon, 1962. 348–53.
Kittel, Gerhard. Theological Dictionary of the New Testament. Vol. 1. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1979.
Shackelford, Don. A Survey of Church History. Montgomery, AL: Amridge University Press, 2010.
ISBE. Vol. 1. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1976.