Baptizo - Immersion vs. Sprinkling - Page 2

kceaster · #41 (**permalink**) 01-16-2008, 12:43 PM

For me, I can't begin to imagine how immersion was a common practice except in those places where water was plentiful. Water is such a precious commodity in those areas of the world. And when we think about the different places where baptisms occurred, it seems like a stretch to affirm complete immersion. On the day of Pentecost, so many people were baptized in an area where the baptism of that many would preclude immersion, no matter how many ceremonial baths are nearby. Cornelius' household may be another example.

The deeper issue may be that we have difficulty getting past the mere sign. When David lifted up his hands as if to signify the evening sacrifice, it does not say that God was displeased with this. Because what David did certainly and spiritually did signify the sacrificial sacrament as it would normally take place in worship. Such is the case with the NT sacraments we've been given. They are real and physical, but that is not the most important thing. God is a spirit and therefore must be worshiped in spirit and truth. When someone is baptized, we see the water, they feel the water as it is applied, so it is real and physical. But much more important is the spiritual aspect that our forebears were correct in stating that mode does not matter, but only the spiritual aspect of it.

I think if we're going to apply a mode to baptism, and baptism signifies the washing away of sin, our ingrafting into Christ, and our engagement to be His, then we should keep in mind that we come to Mount Zion in this sacrament in worship, and that when we come, we come sprinkled with the blood that speaks better things than that of Abel. However we're baptized physically, the important thing is the sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ applied to our sin, sick souls. This is the only way we may live as we come before the consuming fire of our God.

In Christ,

KC

Coram Deo · #42 (**permalink**) 01-16-2008, 12:46 PM

This makes an interesting argument, one I have not heard before.. I am going to have to ponder this for awhile........

Quote:

Originally Posted by bygracealone

Michael, the example of Christ's baptism is that of sprinkling...

Again, to quote from Adam's work. He quotes a scholar by the name of Ben L. Rose:

The law of the Old Testament which Jesus was obeying when He was baptized is found in Numbers 8:6-7. "Take the Levites...and cleanse them. Thus shalt thou do to them to cleanse them: Sprinkle water...upon them." The Levites were priests. Jesus Christ was (and is) a priest (Heb. 3:1; 4:14; 5:5; 9:11); He is our High Priest forever. Christ's baptism was the ceremonial act of His ordination to the priesthood. It was the rite that set Him apart as a priest and a minister of holy things.

Before any man could become a priest, three things were required: first, he must be 30 years old (Num. 4:3,47). (This is why Christ's age at His baptism is given as 30 years in Luke 3:23.); second, he must be called of God as was Aaron, the first high priest (Ex. 28:1). (Christ was thus called, Heb. 5:4-10); and thirdly, he must be sprinkled with water (Num. 8:6-7) by one already a priest (John was a priest, inheriting the office from his father, Ex. 29:9; Num. 25:13; Lk. 1:5, 13). Christ knew His call, waited until He was 30 years old and then came to John "to fulfill all righteousness," that is, to meet the last demand of the Old Testament Law for a priest before He began His public ministry.

As evidence of the fact that Christ was made a priest by John's baptism, we note that when Jesus cleansed the temple (Mt. 21:12; Mk. 11:15), He was exercising the authority of a priest. And when the Jews came to Him asking , "By what authority doest thou these things, and who gave thee this authority?" (Mt. 21:23; Mk. 11:28), Jesus cited to them John's baptism, which He had received, and asked, "Was it from heaven or of men?" In Jesus' mind there is obviously a definite connection between His priestly "authority" and His "baptism by John." He indicates that if John's baptism was from heaven, and He surely believed it was, then He had been truly ordained a priest and possessed authority to cleanse the temple.

Bygracealone · #43 (**permalink**) 01-16-2008, 12:58 PM

As for the practice of the ancient church, I'm not sure I would base any of my practices on their example alone. I think it's great that we know quite a bit about the ancient church, but we also know that the Church back then wasn't right in all matters of faith and practice...

I think it's great when we can go to the Scriptures come to a right conclusion and find that the ancient church also held that conclusion, but I would never encourage anybody to trust a conclusion solely based on an alleged practice of the ancient church...

Not that I think anybody here is doing that... just my

Daniel Ritchie · #44 (**permalink**) 01-16-2008, 03:20 PM

Quote:

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)

Wesley didn't get much right.

etexas · #45 (**permalink**) 01-16-2008, 04:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daniel Ritchie

Quote:

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)

Wesley didn't get much right.

Nice! Brutal....but nice

Daniel Ritchie · #46 (**permalink**) 01-16-2008, 04:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by etexas

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daniel Ritchie

Quote:

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)

Wesley didn't get much right.

Nice! Brutal....but nice

Thank you.

hollandmin · #47 (**permalink**) 04-12-2008, 08:44 PM

I think that the mode is much less significant that what it needs to take place before hand

Quote:

Originally Posted by bygracealone View Post
Michael, the example of Christ's baptism is that of sprinkling...

Mark 1:10 refutes this assertion

Quote:

Before any man could become a priest, three things were required: first, he must be 30 years old (Num. 4:3,47). (This is why Christ's age at His baptism is given as 30 years in Luke 3:23.); second, he must be called of God as was Aaron, the first high priest (Ex. 28:1). (Christ was thus called, Heb. 5:4-10); and thirdly, he must be sprinkled with water (Num. 8:6-7) by one already a priest (John was a priest, inheriting the office from his father, Ex. 29:9; Num. 25:13; Lk. 1:5, 13). Christ knew His call, waited until He was 30 years old and then came to John "to fulfill all righteousness," that is, to meet the last demand of the Old Testament Law for a priest before He began His public ministry.

Only those who were from the line of Levi, were able to become priests, Remember that Christ was not from the line of Aaron. His priesthood was in the order of Melchizedek a priesthood that shall be forever. It is true that Christ was 30, and that he did receive a baptism from John. That being said, if this was to correlate with what was stated in the quote then his baptism too must have been just a ritual cleansing as it was for the Jewish priesthood. If we look at baptism as just that ritual then perhaps this holds true, but if we believe that baptism has some kind of sacramental ability (i.e. the instillation of grace) the "ritual" cleansing would be inappropriate. We do know that after Jesus was baptized (Mark 1:10 "and when he came up out of the water, immediately he saw the heavens opening and the spirit descending on Him like a dove.") John makes reference that he did not know who Jesus was in John 1:31. He may have perhaps had contact with him prior to Jesus' baptism but he didn't know who Jesus was until the spirit lit on Him. The obvious sign was for Israel's sake not not Jesus' He was well aware of who He was, remember, Jesus and the Holy Spirit are one with God in the Trinity, there was nothing hid from Jesus.

Quote:

Jesus cited to them John's baptism, which He had received, and asked, "Was it from heaven or of men?" In Jesus' mind there is obviously a definite connection between His priestly "authority" and His "baptism by John." He indicates that if John's baptism was from heaven, and He surely believed it was, then He had been truly ordained a priest and possessed authority to cleanse the temple.

Jesus new from where His authority came, His discussion with the authorities in the temple where not for His sake the question was for the Priests who knew that John was a Prophet. If they denied Christ's baptism given by John coming from God it would have created hate and discontent with the Jewish people. There was no question that Jesus knew the significance of His baptism, it was a sign for Israel that the Messiah had come this was what fulfilled all righteousness.

Blessings

Kevin · #48 (**permalink**) 04-13-2008, 11:08 PM

Bro. Toby, you missed the point!

Read the earlier posts again.

Archlute · #49 (**permalink**) 04-14-2008, 05:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Semper Fidelis

Quote:

Originally Posted by thunaer

I had a very interesting conversation this week with a Greek Eastern Orthodox Minister. He asked me where I went to church which struck up a conversation about Baptist and Presbyterians. I was explaining how presbyterians believe that you can sprinkle for baptism because they do not believe that the Greek word Baptizo means Immersion...

He butted in and said "What do you mean that Presbyterians do not believe it means immersion", "They can't redefine OUR Greek word." "IT is Our Word, and We know what it means and it means Immersion."

So Sprinklers, How would you answer this?

I'd tell him that just because I can read English and have read Shakespeare that it doesn't make me a Shakesperean scholar.

I'd also note to him that his dorked up ecclesiology, sacramentology, soteriology, and just about every other -ology hardly gives me confidence that he understands what he's reading even if he can read the language.

hollandmin · #50 (**permalink**) 04-15-2008, 08:19 AM

Sorry guys,

Sometimes I just get a little carried away.....