Thread: Immersion question

Originally Posted by jogri17

Question: I can see your viewpoint about needing a credible profession of faith but I don't understand why it must be by immersion. Can you explain by scripture outside of the "baptizo means immersion argument" and also logic is welcomed too for a response.

I moved this question to start a new thread.

Even though water baptism is not mentioned in Romans 6 the death, burial, and resurrection analogy is signified in the going down under the water and the resurrection is signified by coming up to newness of life, out of the water. That is some of the reasoning.

Let me leave you with a quote here.

But whether the person being baptized should be wholly immersed , and whether thrice or once, whether he should be only sprinkled with poured water---these details are of no importance, but ought to be optional to churches according to the diversity of countries. Yet the word 'baptizo' means to immerse, and it is clear that the rite of immersion was observed in the ancient church.

John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, ed. John T. McNeill, 4:15:19 (1320)

Also in the footnotes of Fred Malones book 'The Baptism of Disciples Alone' on page xviv it is noted.

See also Herman Wisius' and Francis Territin's discussions of mode of baptism in the early church. Both admit immersion was the practice, though they claim pouring and sprinkling also was practiced depending upon circumstances such as health or the availability of water.
Economy of the Covenants 1:422-428
Institutes of Elcentic Theology 3:381

Some additonal quotes concerning baptism by immersion:

What Non Baptists Have Said Concerning the Ancient Mode of Baptism

Presbyterian
John Calvin -"The very word "baptize however, signifies to IMMERSE, and it is certain that IMMERSION was the practice of the ancient church."(Institutes of the Christian Religion, chp 15)

John Calvin’s commentary on the Gospel of John
John 3:22-23
22. After these things came Jesus. It is probable that Christ, when the feast was past, came into that part of Judea which was in the vicinity of the town Enon, which was situated in the tribe of Manasseh. The Evangelist says that there were many waters there, and these were not so abundant in Judea. Now geographers tell us, that these two towns, Enon and Salim, were not far from the confluence of the river Jordan and the brook Jabbok; and they add that Scythopolis was near them. From these words, we may infer that John and Christ administered baptism by plunging the whole body beneath the water; though we ought not to give ourselves any great uneasiness about the outward rite, provided that it agree with the spiritual truth, and with the Lord's appointment and rule. So far as we are able to conjecture, the; vicinity of those places caused various reports to be circulated, and many discussions to arise, about the Law, about the worship of God, and about the condition of the Church, in consequence of two persons who administered baptism having arisen at the same time. For when the Evangelist says that Christ baptized, I refer this to the commencement of his ministry; namely, that he then began to exercise publicly the office which was appointed to him by the Father. And though Christ did this by his disciples, yet he is here named as the Author of the baptism, without mentioning his ministers, who did nothing but in his name and by his command. On this subject, we shall have something more to say in the beginning of the next Chapter.


Lutheran
Martin Luther -" I could wish that the baptized should be totally IMMERSED according to the meaning of the word."

Philip Schaff -"IMMERSION and not sprinkling was unquestionably the original normal form of baptism. This is shown by the meaning of the Greek word and the analogy of the baptism of John which was performed in Jordan." (History of the Apostolic Church, p.568).


Roman Catholic
Cardinal Gibbons -"For several centuries after the establishment of Christianity baptism was usually conferred by IMMERSION; but since the 12th century the practice of baptism by infusion has prevailed in the Catholic church, as this manner is attained with less inconvenience than by IMMERSION (Faith of our Fathers p. 317)

Methodist
John Wesley -commenting on Rom 6:4- "We are buried with Him- alluding to the ancient manner of baptism by IMMERSION (Explanatory notes Upon the New Testament, p. 376)

George Whitefield -commenting on Rom 6:4- "It is certain that the words of our text is an allusion to the manner of baptism by IMMERSION

Episcopalians
Conybeare and Howson -commenting on Rom 6:4-":This passage cannot be undersood unless it is understood that the primitive baptism was by IMMERSION."

Originally Posted by refbaptdude

Some additonal quotes concerning baptism by immersion:

What Non Baptists Have Said Concerning the Ancient Mode of Baptism

Presbyterian
John Calvin -"The very word "baptize however, signifies to IMMERSE, and it is certain that IMMERSION was the practice of the ancient church."(Institutes of the Christian Religion, chp 15)

John Calvin’s commentary on the Gospel of John
John 3:22-23
22. After these things came Jesus. It is probable that Christ, when the feast was past, came into that part of Judea which was in the vicinity of the town Enon, which was situated in the tribe of Manasseh. The Evangelist says that there were many waters there, and these were not so abundant in Judea. Now geographers tell us, that these two towns, Enon and Salim, were not far from the confluence of the river Jordan and the brook Jabbok; and they add that Scythopolis was near them. From these words, we may infer that John and Christ administered baptism by plunging the whole body beneath the water; though we ought not to give ourselves any great uneasiness about the outward rite, provided that it agree with the spiritual truth, and with the Lord's appointment and rule. So far as we are able to conjecture, the; vicinity of those places caused various reports to be circulated, and many discussions to arise, about the Law, about the worship of God, and about the condition of the Church, in consequence of two persons who administered baptism having arisen at the same time. For when the Evangelist says that Christ baptized, I refer this to the commencement of his ministry; namely, that he then began to exercise publicly the office which was appointed to him by the Father. And though Christ did this by his disciples, yet he is here named as the Author of the baptism, without mentioning his ministers, who did nothing but in his name and by his command. On this subject, we shall have something more to say in the beginning of the next Chapter.


Lutheran
Martin Luther -" I could wish that the baptized should be totally IMMERSED according to the meaning of the word."

Philip Schaff -"IMMERSION and not sprinkling was unquestionably the original normal form of baptism. This is shown by the meaning of the Greek word and the analogy of the baptism of John which was performed in Jordan." (History of the Apostolic Church, p.568).


Roman Catholic
Cardinal Gibbons -"For several centuries after the establishment of Christianity baptism was usually conferred by IMMERSION; but since the 12th century the practice of baptism by infusion has prevailed in the Catholic church, as this manner is attained with less inconvenience than by IMMERSION (Faith of our Fathers p. 317)

Methodist
John Wesley -commenting on Rom 6:4- "We are buried with Him- alluding to the ancient manner of baptism by IMMERSION (Explanatory notes Upon the New Testament, p. 376)

George Whitefield -commenting on Rom 6:4- "It is certain that the words of our text is an allusion to the manner of baptism by IMMERSION

Episcopalians
Conybeare and Howson -commenting on Rom 6:4-":This passage cannot be undersood unless it is understood that the primitive baptism was by IMMERSION."

Baptism by 'infusion'? Does he mean 'affusion'?

Ken,

Yes, it seems that RC's use the term 'infusion' interchangeable with 'affusion'.

See:
Baptism: Immersion Only?

Regarding the mode of baptism, arguments have been raised over whether exclusive immersion or immersion is better?

On the other hand, does Bible really teaches immersion as a correct mode of baptism or not.

There is no old testament example of any immersion regarding to old testament various washing, and immersion does not in any sense signify the inward meaning of a Christian baptism. Most importantly, there is no record of baptism by immersion in the new testament also.

Jesus came up out of the water,

Romans 6 speaks of death, burial and resurrection,

John the Baptist picked his place of baptism because "there was much water there."

The Greek for baptize overwhelmingly designates to dip, bathe, immerse or be covered thoroughly with water.

Originally Posted by YXU

Regarding the mode of baptism, arguments have been raised over whether exclusive immersion or immersion is better?

On the other hand, does Bible really teaches immersion as a correct mode of baptism or not.

There is no old testament example of any immersion regarding to old testament various washing, and immersion does not in any sense signify the inward meaning of a Christian baptism. Most importantly, there is no record of baptism by immersion in the new testament also.

I am assuming that you haven't read the description for this forum:

A place where only Credo-Baptists may answer questions posed regarding the Confessinal understanding of the Ordinance of Baptism.

No harm done but since you are a professing Presbyterian please refrain from posting in this forum in the future.

Is he Presby or only attending a Presby church (i.e. is there hope for him or not?)...

Originally Posted by Pergamum

Is he Presby or only attending a Presby church (i.e. is there hope for him or not?)...

I am a presbyterian and attends a presbyterian church, I have no hope in myself, but in Jesus Christ always. 阿门！

I apologize for not reading the description and disturb your internal discussion.