Posted by Yong TM (202.172.43.132) on March 08, 2003 at 13:30:02:
In Reply to: water baptism : by touch or immersion . the meaning? posted by Stephen Chai on March 06, 2003 at 14:22:22:
You are asking a question that splits denominations.
Since this is a site on Reformed Theology, you need to know that most churches that adheres to this school of thought do not consider immersion to be essential; and would accept the sprinkling method. This is specifically stated in the Westminster Confession of Faith, which states that "Dipping of the person into the water is not necessary; but baptism is rightly administered by pouring, or sprinkling water upon the person" (Chapter 28). This is a stand that came about because of various arguments. Those that I can think about off-hand would be:
1. Scripture has no clear teaching on the methodology of baptism.
2. The word baptism has unclear definitions.
3. By speculation, it is unlikely that the river Jordan was more than a knee high stream, so immersion would be impractical. Also, the prison warden and his family in Acts would probably be baptised by sprinkling rather than immersion.
But people who advocate immersion would argue strongly that baptism means immersion. The Baptist churches actually have different Chinese Bibles than those in Presbyterian Churches. For John the Baptist, the 'Presbyterian' Bibles actually calls him 'Shi Xi Yue Han' (John the 'sprinkler'-baptist); while the 'Baptist' Bible calls him 'Shi Jin Yue Han' (John the 'immersion'-baptist). Also, all words for baptism in Chinese are 'Xi' (sprinkling) for 'Presbyterian' Bibles, and 'Jin' (immersion) for 'Baptist' Bibles. So you can see the strong stands taken by these denominations.
Immersion-advocates not only argue that the Bible has always talked about immersion, they also argue that immersion is symbolically a complete, total transformation of the person, having been completely immersed and emerging from the water a completely new person.
In reformed understanding (and even the Baptist would concede this), baptism is NOT the guarantee of salvation, in that people who are baptised may NOT be truly saved; while people who are NOT baptised may still be saved. So in this respect then, it would seem strange for people to insist in this 'secondary' issue so strongly that churches should split.
There are also practical problems with the immersion model. Dying patients in a hospital for example, cannot be immersed. I personally witnessed one immersion baptism session where the lady to be immersed was not a swimmer, so was terrified of going under the water. The pastor literally forced her into the water, and she emerged coughing and badly shaken.
The more sensitive approach is for each to answer to his own conscience on this matter, and not to force it too hard. I am actually the right person to ask this question, because I too have had the same experience.
When I was studying in the US, I served in a Southern Baptist church. I did everything in that church, driving the church van in the morning to fetch old folks to church, teaching in Sunday School, leading the Youth Fellowship, translating every Sunday for the pastor. But because I am a Presbyterian who was baptised with sprinkling, I was told by the pastor that my baptism 'does not count', and I need to be immersed again. If I do not do that, the church cannot elect me into official positions like deaconship.
On my part, I firmly believe that when I first got baptised by sprinkling, it was a true testimony of my allegiance to Jesus Christ (which is what Baptism essentially is - a public declaration of faith). It is not a 'magic ritual', so I do not believe that I need to do this again. So I steadfastly refused to be re-baptised again. In the end, I never received any official titles in the church, but I can honestly tell you I out-served everyone else although I was never an official member of that church.
In my humble opinion, baptism modes are minor issues. The more important thing is what baptism means to the individual, and if the individual truly aspires to be true to the promises made during baptism. The sad fact is thousands are baptised all over the world everyday, whether by sprinkling or immersion; and very, very few are true to the promises they utter during their baptism. That is the key issue. Church leaders should learn not to bark at the wrong tree...