04.15. Action of Baptism

ACTION OF BAPTISM

All the great religious bodies professing to believe the New Testament to be the word of God hold that to be a member of their respective churches one must submit to baptism, or to what they call baptism; and, in administering the rite, they refer to Matthew 28:18-19 as their authority for performing the rite.

Some hold that baptism may be performed by sprinkling, pouring, or immersion, while others insist that immersion only is baptism. In giving the command to "baptize" Jesus certainly used a word which had a clear, definite meaning, and used that word with its commonly accepted meaning. From the lexicons of the language used in recording what Jesus said, we may easily learn the "meaning of this word, and also from the practice of the inspired men performing the act commanded by the Master. The command of Christ was recorded in the Greek language, that being the language in which the New Testament was written. The word "baptize" is from the Greek word baptizo. The question is not what does the word "baptize" mean as now used, but what does the word "baptizo," as used by inspired men, mean? What was the meaning of the word when Christ gave the Commission?

Baptizo:"To dip in or under water."—Liddell and Scott.

Sophocles, a native Greek, in his lexicon defines Baptizo: "To dip, to immerse: to sink."

Thayer, who is without doubt, the greatest New Testament Greek lexicographer in all the world, defines Baptizo: "To dip repeatedly, to immerge, submerge."

We could quote a great many Greek lexicons, but why should we, since there is not a recognized standard Greek lexicon in the world which defines the word otherwise than the foregoing.

BAPTISM ADMINISTERED BY INSPIRED MEN.

If one could be an eye witness of a baptism administered by inspired men, the question as to what act they performed would be settled; but since this is not possible for us in this day, let us determine from the inspired records just what act was performed.

JOHN BAPTIZED IN THE RIVER JORDAN.

"And they were baptized of him in the River Jordan, confessing their sins" (Matthew 3:6). And Jesus "was baptized of John in Jordan" (Mark 1:9). After his baptism it is said: "And straightway coming up out of the water, he saw the heavens rent asunder, and the Spirit as a dove descending on him" (Mark 1:9-10).

"And John also was baptizing in Aenon near to Salim, because there was much water there" (John 3:25).

Much water is not required for sprinkling or pouring; neither do those who have water sprinkled or poured on them "come up out of the water," as did Jesus immediately after his baptism; neither does anyone sprinkle or pour anyone in or into a river. All these conditions and circumstances are met, however, in immersion.

PHILIP BAPTIZES THE EUNUCH.

"And as they went on their way they came unto a certain Water; and the eunuch saith, Behold, here is water; what doth hinder me to be baptized? And he commanded the chariot to stand still: and they both went down into the water, both Philip and the eunuch; and he baptized him. And when they came up out of the water, the Spirit of the Lord caught away Philip; and the eunuch saw him no more, for he went on his way rejoicing" (Acts 8:36-39).

1. They came to the water.

2. They went down into the water.

3. Philip baptized the eunuch.

4. They came up out of the water. The baptizing took place after they went down into the water, and before they came up out of the water. The same procedure is followed in every case of immersion, but is never necessary in sprinkling or pouring. (See lesson on "Conversion of the Eunuch" in this volume of Sound Doctrine.) BAPTISM IS A BURIAL.

"We were buried therefore with him through baptism into death" (Romans 6:4).

"Having been buried with him in baptism, wherein ye were also raised with him through faith in the working of God, who raised him from the dead" (Colossians 2:12).

Mr. Wesley, the founder of the Methodist Church says, commenting on Romans 6:4, "We were buried with him—Alluding to the ancient manner of baptizing by immersion" (Wesley’s Notes).

These passages so completely reveal the fact that in baptizing there was an immersion, that it seems to us unnecessary to make even a comment. Certainly every one knows that in sprinkling or pouring water on a person, just a few drops of water, there is not, there cannot be, a burial, nor is there anything that even resembles a burial. Every ordinary reader of the New Testament would, unless misled, understand that in baptism there is an immersion.

BAPTISM NOT TO PUT AWAY FILTH OF FLESH,

Peter declare that baptism is not to put away the filth of the flesh (1 Peter 3:21). A little reflection will show the student the significance of Peter’s statement. Both Jews and Greeks were accustomed to the practice of plunging into the water to put away the filth of the flesh. Hence, in seeing Christians immerse people, they would likely conclude that they were doing it to wash away the dirt from their bodies; but no such thought would have ever entered their minds had the practice of the Christians been to slightly moisten the fore­heads of the people for baptism. There can be no escape from the conclusion that Peter’s language teaches that they were immersed when baptized.

CLAIMS TO AFFUSIONISTS CONSIDERED.

Controversalists among those who sprinkle and pour for baptism seek to offset the foregoing facts. In so doing, not only do they disregard the foregoing facts, but they practically disregard the scholarship of the world. No one thing is more clearly established by the scholarship of the world than that the apostles always immersed.

Ezekiel 36:25. "And I will sprinkle clean water upon you, and ye shall be clean: from all your filthiness, and from all your idols, will I cleanse you." It is claimed by affusionists that this prophecy of Ezekiel refers to baptism under the New Covenant. Replying we would say:

1st. If this passage refers to baptism it proves too much for the affusionist, for they stoutly insist that baptism has nothing to do with cleansing people from their sins; whereas this passage declares, as a result of this sprinkling, they were to be cleansed from all their filthiness and idols.

2nd. The prophet in this passage does not refer to baptism, or the Christian dispensation, but to the national restoration of Israel from captivity in Babylon.

3rd. Read the entire passage (Ezekiel 36:22-31). It is plainly declared that the Lord would gather them out of all nations and countries, and bring them into their own land. Ezekiel prophesied during the early days of the captivity of Israel in Babylon (Ezekiel 1:1-3). After the restoration mentioned in this passage, and after the cleansing by sprinkling, they were to dwell in the land God gave their fathers, and the Lord would cause the cities to be inhabited, and the waste places to be built. The desolate land was to be tilled, whereas it was desolation in the sight of all that passed by; and the grain was to be multiplied. Years after Ezekiel uttered this prophecy the Jews did return from Babylon to their own land. When a Jew became unclean from any cause he was to have the water of cleansing sprinkled on him. The preparation and use of this water is described in Numbers nineteenth chapter. Having been denied in foreign lands, they must have the water of cleansing (clean water) sprinkled upon them. It is astonishing that any Bible student would refer to this passage as proof of sprinkling for baptism, when, as a matter of fact, it was certainly fulfilled when the Jews returned from Babylon to inhabit the land of their fathers.

WATER ALONE NEVER SPRINKLED OR POURED. In all the Bible, there is not one instance where, by the authority of Jehovah, water, simply water, water unmixed with any other element, was ever, for any purpose, by anyone, sprinkled or poured on anyone.

Baptize With Water. It is argued that John baptized "with water," and that therefore he applied the water to the subject, just as in whipping the boy "with a switch" the switch is applied to the boy. But we also wash clothes "with water," but not by sprinkling water upon them; and we dye clothes "with dye," but not by sprinkling dye upon them. The fact is, nothing can be proved, as to the act, by the use of the word "with." The word "baptize" tells what was done, and the expression "with water" names the element used; just as the expression that Christ will baptize "with the Holy Spirit" declares, by the word "baptize" what he would do, and "with Spirit" named the element he would use. But the American Standard Version, which is regarded by most scholars as the best translation, renders the passage, "I indeed baptize you in water" (Matthew 3:11). This is the correct translation.

BAPTIZED IN THE SPIRIT. The argument relied on by the affusionist as the most conclusive is the following: John said the apostles would be baptized with the Holy Spirit (Matthew 3:11). The apostles were baptized in the Holy Spirit on the first Pentecost after the resurrection of Christ (Acts 2:1-4). Peter applied the prophecy of Joel, "I will pour forth or my Spirit upon all flesh" (Joel 2:28), to the baptism (Acts 2:17). Therefore, it is argued, God’s way of baptizing is by pouring. This is the strongest argument an affusionist can make for his contention, that sprinkling or pouring is baptism. The facts are, the apostles were overwhelmed in the power and influence of the Spirit. (Even affusionists will not have it that they had just a little of the Holy Spirit sprinkled upon them.) The overwhelming was the baptism. Let it be remembered that Jesus told the apostles to go to Jerusalem, and there tarry till they were "clothed with power from on high" (Luke 24:49). The word "clothed is from the Greek word enduo. This word is found again in 2 Corinthians 5:4, where it is translated "clothed." "For indeed we that are in this tabernacle do groan, being burdened; not for that we would be unclothed, but that we would be clothed upon (enduo), that what is mortal may be swallowed up of life." Paul here is expressing his longing for the house, body, he had just made reference to in the first verse of this chapter: "for we know that if the earthly house of our tabernacle be dissolved, we have a building from God, a house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens." In his body of flesh he was groaning, not wishing to be unclothed, but clothed upon (enduo) with the house from heaven—the immortal body. Surely no one thinks he was longing for a little im­mortality to be sprinkled on his head, or for a little immortality to be poured on him; but he was longing for the mortal to be swallowed up of life. The Lord promised the apostles they would be baptized in the Holy Spirit (Acts 1:6; Acts 1:6). In Luke 24:49 he calls it being "clothed" (enduo) with power from on high. From this it must follow that to be baptized in the Holy Spirit is to be clothed in the Spirit. Hence, in their baptism in the Holy Spirit (Acts 2:1-4), they were clothed, or swallowed up, in the Spirit—completely overwhelmed, submerged. The falling rain fills a pool, and a person is baptized in that pool—would anyone say he was baptized by sprinkling? The water pours from a hydrant into a baptistry, and one is baptized in it—would anyone say he was baptized by pouring? or that he was immersed by pouring? Put a coin in a glass of water and pour water into the glass till the coin is covered. It is immersed—was it immersed by pouring? It is also buried. Was the pouring immersion? Was the pouring the burial? But enough water was poured on it to cover it, to overwhelm it; and this covering—this overwhelming, was the immersion, the burial. Just so with the baptism in the Holy Spirit. The Spirit was poured out on the apostles till they were completely under its influence, overwhelmed by the Spirit; and this overwhelming was the baptism. If the pouring was the baptism, then, as soon as the pouring ceased, the baptism ceased, whereas they continued to be overwhelmed, continued in this baptism.

Baptized in the Cloud and Sea. "For I would not, brethren, have you ignorant, "that our fathers were all under the cloud, and all passed through the sea; and were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea" (1 Corinthians 10:1-2). In connection with this passage the affusionist quotes Psalms 68:7-9, "O God, when thou wentest forth before thy people, when thou didst march through the wilderness; the earth trembled, the heavens also dropped rain at the presence of God, the God of Israel. Thou, O God, didst send a plentiful rain," and contend that this rain was at the crossing of the Red Sea, and that the falling of the rain on them was the baptism. They are clearly wrong in making such contention, for

• The rain mentioned in this passage has no more reference to what took place at the crossing of the Red Sea than it does to the rain which fell at the end of the drouth in the days of Elijah. The fact is David was speaking of what took place at Sinai.

• If it could be proved that it rained when they crossed the Red Sea (but it cannot, for it is expressly stated that they crossed on dry ground, Exodus 14:22), it would be easy to prove that they were not baptized in, that is, by the rain. Paul says they were baptized "in the cloud and in the sea." There were two elements, cloud and sea, in their baptism. Any theory that leaves out one or both of these elements is wrong. To say that they were baptized by spray blown from the sea leaves out the cloud—one element in which Paul says they were baptized. To say they were baptized by falling rain, leaves out both the elements in which Paul says they were baptized. Paul does not say they were baptized in the rain, but in the "cloud and in the sea." Read the account of this in Exodus 14:15-25. The waters stood upright on either side of them as they marched across (Exodus 15:8), making a channel through which they marched (Exodus 14:22). The cloud, which guided them in their march, "removed from before them, and stood behind them," thus completely hiding them from the Egyptians, submerging the Israelites, burying them out of the Egyptians’ sight. Hence, they were baptized, overwhelmed, in the cloud and in the sea, as Paul declares. If some one should argue that this cloud became a pillar of fire by night to give Israel light, let it be remembered that Paul calls it a cloud, and so does Moses (Exodus 14:19-20). It was darkness on the side next to the Egyptians, but light on the side next to the Israelites. This the record plainly declares. Neither did the cloud pour out rain on Israel, for it stood behind them to hide them from the Egyptians.

HISTORY OF SPRINKLING FOR BAPTISM.

Dr. Wall, of the Church of England, in his history of Infant Baptism, says: "Their general and ordinary way was to baptize by immersion, or dipping the person, whether it was an infant, or grown man or woman, into the water. This is so plain and clear by an infinite number of passages, that, as one cannot but pity the weak endeavours of such paedobaptists as would maintain the negative of it; so also we ought to disown and show a dislike of the profane scoffs which some people give to the English antipaedobaptists merely for their use of dipping. It is one thing to maintain that that circumstance is not absolutely necessary to the essence of baptism, and another, to go about to represent it as ridiculous and foolish, or as shameful and indecent; when it was in all probability the way by which our blessed Savior, and for certain was the most usual and ordinary way by which the ancient Christians, did receive their baptism" (Vo. 2, pp. 384, 385). ,

Dr. Wall then gives several instances of what was called baptism without immersion. The most ancient one he cites is that of Novatian in A. D. 251 (Wall, Vol. 2, pp. 385, 433), who, while confined to his bed by sickness, had water poured on and around him? This is the first instance of anything but immersion being called baptism known in religious history. Dr. Wall gives the case of Novation as one of "the most ancient instances of that sort of baptism that are now extant in records" (Vol. 1, pp. 390).

Sprinkling Legalized. "The council of Revenna (1311) was the first to allow a choice between sprinkling and immersion" — Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia, Vol. 1, pp. 201.

SPRINKLING IN THE BIBLE. In all the Bible there is not one instance of sprinkling being called baptism. Not one!!

We do not find where water alone was ever sprinkled on any one in Old Testament times. Water mixed with blood, water mixed with oil, water mixed with ashes of a heifer, was sprinkled, but never was unmixed water sprinkled or poured on any one for anything, by the authority of God. In Numbers 19 will be found direction for making the water of purifying, or clean water, which God commanded to be used in the sprinklings of the Old Testament times.

TOPICS FOR INVESTIGATION AND DISCUSSION.

QUESTIONS.