If the word Baptize means "to immerse completely" why sprinkle anyone?

Question

The Bible only gives one mode of Baptism: dunking someone completely under water. As a matter of fact, it is all that the New Testament Christians knew - their very word meant nothing but to dunk completely. So, here is my question, how can someone justify "baptism" without Immersion?

Answer 1

Why indeed? A list is in order:

1. It's like using that small spare tire in the trunk instead of using a real tire.
2. The sprinkle bowl was to small to fit into.
3. Hydrophobia!
4. There's just enough water to go around.
5. Somebody misunderstood, then taxed the indulgences, and now-a-days that's just the way we've always done it.

Answer 2

First of all, the Catholic Church doesn't "sprinke" anyone. The Church approves two methods - immersion, and pouring of water three times over the head. Both methods were used in the Church from the very beginning, as revealed by many historic sources. Remember, the early Church existed in a desert land, where often the only source of water available for many miles was the town well. When the Apostles preached and baptized in these regions, they certainly didn't immerse anyone. Also, historical writings clearly show that infants were baptized from earliest times, and they obviously were not immersed either.

It is true that immersion in water symbolizes death and resurrection, and the pouring of the water symbolizes exactly the same thing. The real reason that Baptism is called "baptism" however it that it is an immersion in the grace of God, an immersion in the Holy Spirit. Churches which have reduced this glorious sacrament to a mere symbolic gesture would naturally miss this essential symbolism.

The Bible does not describe any method of baptism. However, it is significant that every known early work of art depicting the baptism of Jesus shows Him standing in the water next to John, sometimes ankle deep, sometimes waist deep, and John pouring water over His head, either from his hand or from a shell. Apparently the early Church didn't think Jesus had been baptized by immersion. They no doubt assumed He had been baptized the same way most of them had been baptized - by the pouring of water.

Answer 3

If baptism is a representation of the ressurection, completely under, then rising again into a new life... I do not think that 'sprinkling' is acceptable. Especially in the orthodox/catholic faiths. A baby has no concept of repentance and cannot live a new life. A state of accountability must be reached first.

So, the immersion has to be understood by those being immersed. But, I do not think if there was no water available and a man died 2 minutes after confessing Jesus, that he would be denied for lack of water.

Answer 4

Actually, it does not give only a single mode. The baptism of Acts 16 clearly does not happen at the river, since it appears to obviously be in the context of treating the wounded Christians in a bath.

Also, St. Peter clearly warns against "water legalism" earlier in Acts 10, when he tells of the holy-spirit filled catechumens, "Can anyone withhold the water for baptizing these people, who have received the holy Spirit even as we have?"

Then there's the scene that you'd have noticed in "The Passion of the Christ" when water left the side of Jesus, the very symbol of the "life giving water" Jesus spoke of at Sychar. The moment baptism took on its efficacy was when the water and the blood emerged from his side.

Now clearly this didn't happen in amounts that would have "immersed" anyone. And yet this was the very moment that true baptism into eternal life was born. So how can we say that immersion was necessary when this first baptism of the new life itself probably produced no more than a trickle or stream?

Insistence on immersion puts the emphasis on the rite or sacrament, and not on the saving power of Christ. It isn't the amount of water that saves - it is the grace and truth of Jesus, given in baptism, that saves.

Its about Jesus. Not the abundance of H20.

Answer 5

It is unintentionally funny how roman catholic (and some other) Christian churches make a big deal about the "commitment" of a young uninformed soul, just born, and probably totally sleeping through it, or crying in loud protest! It is ALSO unintentionally funny how roman catholic (and some other) Christian film-makers show Jesus, and others, wading out into waist-hith (even chest-high) water, only to be sprinkled on their head. In the Bible, adults were baptized out in the water, not sprinkled as babies. What kind of credit can God give oblivious crying infants for being forced to be sprinkled by their birth parents' church? What is that child is orphaned and raised by atheists? Does a sprinkle of "holy water" when sleeping as a baby cange the heart? God's word says He judges the heart!!! Does a criminal go to heaven because he was "forced" to have water "sprinkled" on it's head, when it could not even understand language yet... let alone the sacraficial obedience of being baptized as God commanded. I don't think their parents, or their church even gets it! Baptism is supposed to MEAN something!!! Our church christens babies, but we call it "baby dedication", a parent's commitment (not a sleeping baby's baptism). Full emursion baptism comes when we are old enough to obey God's will with understanding and true commitment! Sprinkling is OK...just don't think you don't need a real Christian baptism because you we christened when ou were so young you were totally unaware of it.

Answer 6

well dude...u find me one place in the bible where they sprinkled water on someones head... and find me one place where they baptized in the name of the father son and holy ghost, I am aware of matthew 28:19 I think it is...but Jesus Name is the name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost, Every single person in the Bible that was baptized was dunked under water in Jesus name...thats the way its supposed to be but Satan perverts the scriptures so ppl do not recieve the full baptism which signifys the burial of your sins, as repentance being death and being baptized with the holy ghost and speaking in tounges as the spitiy gives utterance is the ressurection...Ive been baptized by Immersion and it reely feels like your soul is being cleaned and I know ppl that have done both and they say Immersion is the only way to really feel a touch from God

Answer 7

It is a symbol for the true baptism//Either way sprinkled or dunked, does not mean you are there.. The true baptism you go through the fire and after a long process of conversion of mind and body, of "rebirth", going through a dark tunnel, the Night, the desert, you in the end will receive the watery batism, latter rain or purple rain or the Living Water.... Then you are Home//

Read the lyrics of that song, He is talking to us all the time..He only wants to see you laughing in the purple rain..!!

Love

Answer 8

The simplest answer to this question is to understand the meaning of the word "baptize." It comes from a Greek word which means to "submerge in water." Therefore, baptism by sprinkling and baptism by pouring are oxymorons, they are self-contradictory. Baptism by sprinkling would mean "submerging someone in water by sprinkling water on them." Baptism, by its inherent definition, must be an act of immersion in water.

In the Bible, only believers who had placed their faith in Christ were baptized - as a public testimony of their faith and identification with Him (Acts 2:38; Romans 6:3-4). Water baptism by immersion is a step of obedience after faith in Christ. It is a proclamation of faith in Christ, a statement of submission to Him, and an identification with His death, burial, and resurrection. The action of being immersed in the water pictures being buried with Christ. The action of coming out of the water pictures Christ’s resurrection. As a result, baptism by immersion is the only method of baptism which illustrates being buried with Christ, and being raised with Him.

Baptism by sprinkling and/or pouring came into practice as a result of the unbiblical practice of infant baptism. With this in view, infant baptism is not a Biblical practice. An infant cannot place his or her faith in Christ. An infant cannot make a conscious decision to obey Christ. An infant cannot understand what water baptism symbolizes. The Bible does not record any infants being baptized. Even the method of infant baptism fails to agree with the Bible.

Answer 9

Sometimes, theng must be done with practicality in mind.

In order to fully imerse a person in water, you need a pool of water such as a lake or river. Does this mean that people who live in a dessert or in the mountains where there are no pools or rivers cannot be baptized? Also, what about those people who because of physical disabilities or very poor health cannot be immersed in water? Can they not be baptized?

Jesus commanded that we be baptized in water and the Spirit.

Answer 10

Good question. I agree baptism is by immersion after someone has accepted Jesus as their Savior. It is a public profession of their faith.