Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The practice of baptism in the New Testament was carried out in one manner. The person who was being baptized was immersed or put completely under the water and then brought back up again. Since this was the mode carried out in the New Testament Bible, why is it that some religions sprinkle rather than immerse their members in water?
Even the Greek word baptizo means "to plunge, dip, immerse" something in water.
If we look in Mark 1:5, people were baptized by John the Baptist "in the river Jordan." Mark also tells us that when Jesus had been baptized "he came up out of the water" Mark 1:10.
When Phillip had shared the gospel with the Ethiopian eunuch, "as they went along the road they came to some water, and the eunuch said, 'See, here is water! What is to prevent my being baptized?'" Acts 8:36.
In all of these cases, no sprinklling was used. If Jesus, himself, set the example for how all christians should be baptized, then I am just curious as to how or why did sprinkling become a substitute for immersion in some churches as a mode of baptizing members?
It comes from a Greek word which means “to submerge in water." Therefore, baptism by sprinkling or by pouring is an oxymoron, Baptism by sprinkling would mean "submerging someone in water by sprinkling water on them. It is an act of immersion in water.
Wow...with all due respect, Shana, the man that wrote that article took way too many liberties with his thinking, especially when speaking of the baptisms that took place in the NT. He had to really stretch his imagination to make them agree with his thoughts.
Plus, I believe when we're commanded to do something we need to look first to the NT. The word in the NT means to immerse.
You may be right about the man taking liberties, Msjamiedawn I was just sharing the article to share the reasons why some believe that sprinking is acceptable. To immerse, submerge is the definition I am reading and I tend to agree with Fundamentalist on the defintion of submerge. One dictionary def. is
submerge verb1. sink below the surface; go under or as if under water 2. cover completely or make imperceptible; "I was drowned in work"; "The noise drowned out her speech" 3. put under water; "submerge your head completely" 4. fill or cover completely, usually with water
"Philip baptized the Ethiopian eunuch in a desert (Acts 8:36). If there had been a river nearby, it would not have been a desert. It must have been a small oasis with a spring."
It must have been? Then why does verse 38 read, "and they went down into the water, both Philip and the eunuch; and he baptized him."? Why would they both have to go into the water, if he just sprinkled some on his head?
Paul's baptism in Acts 9:18 seems to indicate that he stood up and was baptized on the spot. If so, he could not have been immersed since he was inside a house.
That is definitely adding your own opinion. Recently, my brother and sister in law were at my apt, and they wanted to be baptized. I could tell you the story, and just say, they immediately were baptized. Does that mean they were sprinkled in my living room? No, what actually happened was, they immediately went downstairs to the pool, and were immersed.
Read the scripture with what the word actually means, immersed, and then you would have to conclude that he was not baptized inside.
Apparently, Cornelius was baptized indoors (Acts 10:48).
Again, another view that just isn't there...."and he commanded them to be baptized (immersed) in the name of the Lord." So they obviously went somewhere that they could be immersed.
The Philippian Jailer was baptized indoors at night (Acts 16:33).
A very bold statement, but no where does scripture say this. It does say he was baptized (immersed) straightway.
My "opinion" that they went somewhere else to be baptized holds more water (haha, no pun intended!) than this man's, since baptism means immerse.
Edited to add: No on here quoted these... it was from the link above...thanks!
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I was just sharing the article to share the reasons why some believe that sprinking is acceptable. To immerse, submerge is the definition I am reading and I tend to agree with Fundamentalist on the defintion of submerge. One dictionary def. is
