Announcement

Collapse

Message to all users:

https://carm.org/forum-rules

Super Member Subscription
https://carm.org/carm-super-members-banner-ad-signup

As most of you are aware, we had a crash to forums and were down for over two days a while back. We did have to do an upgrade to the vbulletin software to fix the forums and that has created changes, VB no longer provide the hybrid or threaded forums. There are some issues/changes to the forums we are not able to fix or change. Also note the link address change, please let friends and posters know of the changed link to the forums. For now this is the only link available, https://forums.carm.org/vb5/ but if clicking on forum on carm.org homepage it will now send you to this link. (edited to add https: now working.

Again, we are working through some of the posting and viewing issues to learn how to post with the changes, you will have to check and test the different features, icons that have changed. You may also want to go to profile settings,since many of the notifications, information in profile, also to update/edit your avatar by clicking on avatar space, pull down arrow next to login for user settings.

Edit to add "How to read forums, to make it easier."
Pull down arrow next to login name upper right select profile, or user settings when page opens to profile,select link in tab that says Account. Then select/choose options, go down to Conversation Detail Options, Select Display mode Posts, NOT Activity, that selection of Posts will make the pages of discussions go to last post on last page rather than out of order that happens if you choose activity threads. Then be sure to go to bottom and select SAVE Changes in your profile options. You can then follow discussions by going through the pages, to the last page having latest responses. Then click on the other links Privacy, Notifications, to select viewing options,the forums get easier if you open all the tabs or links in your profile, user settings and select options. To join Super Member, pull down arrow next to login name, select User Settings and then click on tab/link at top that says Subscriptions.

Thank you for your patience and God Bless.

Diane S
https://carm.org/forum-rules
See more
See less

BAPTISM_IS IT_POUR-SPRINKLE-IMMERSE_WHICH_&_WHY_

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • BAPTISM_IS IT_POUR-SPRINKLE-IMMERSE_WHICH_&_WHY_


    STRONG'S #907 baptizw {bap-tid'-zo}
    Meaning:
    1)to dip repeatedly, to immerse, to submerge (of vessels sunk)
    2)to cleanse by dipping or submerging,
    to wash, to make clean with water,
    to wash one's self, bathe
    3)to overwhelm

    5682 Tense - Aorist (See 5777) Voice - Passive (See 5786) Mood - Imperative (See 5794) Count - 40

    SPRINKLING - POURING- IMMERSION ALL IN ONE REFERENCE SHOWING USE.
    [1][epixeei (epixew) vifa3s][POURING]
    [2][bayei (baptw) vifa3s] IMMERSING]
    [3][ranei (rainw) vifa3s][SPRINKLING]
    Leviticus 14:15 And the priest shall take some of the log of oil, and (1)pour it into the palm of his own left hand:16 And the priest shall (2)dip his right finger in the oil that is in his left hand, and shall (3)sprinkle of the oil with his finger seven times before the LORD:

    (1)epixeei = indicative future active 3rd person singular form of verb [UBS]epixew = pour on [epixeei (epixew) vifa3s]

    (2)bapsei = indicative future active 3rd person singular form of verb [UBS]baptw = (pf. pass. be,bammai) dip ( bebaĆ ai[mati covered with blood Re 19.13) [bayei (baptw) vifa3s]

    (3)ranei = indicative future active 3rd person singular form of verb [UBS]rainw = sprinkle (Re 19.13) [ranei (rainw) vifa3s]

    [baptistheetw (baptizw) vmap--3s]
    Acts 2:38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be (4)baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.
    baptistheetw (baptizw) vmap--3s
    [4]baptistheetw = imperative aorist passive 3rd person singular form of verb [UBS]baptizw = immerse; wash;dip;

    {907 bapti,zw baptizo {bap-tid'-zo}
    Meaning: 1) to dip repeatedly, to immerse, to submerge (of vessels sunk) 2) to cleanse by dipping or submerging, to wash, to make clean with water, to wash one's self, bathe 3) to overwhelm

    5682 Tense - Aorist (See 5777) Voice - Passive (See 5786) Mood - Imperative (See 5794)}

    Revelation 19:13 And he was clothed with a vesture (4)dipped in blood: and his name is called The Word of God.

    (5)bebammenon = perf pass acc neut sing participle form of verb [UBS]baptw = (pf. passive bebammai) dip ( bebaaimati covered with blood Re 19.13)
    [bebammenon (baptw) vprpan-s]

    CONCLUSION: SPRINKLING AND POURING IS NOT IMMERSIOIN = BAPTISM

    Some of this material has been posted by me on other websites.
    By law, I cannot plagiarize my own work. The burden of proof is on the accuser.
    If you accuse me of plagiarism, you will face it again at the judgment

  • #2
    Originally posted by Theo Book View Post
    SPRINKLING AND POURING IS NOT IMMERSIOIN = BAPTISM
    No problem. One of the MOST IDIOTIC examples of "Catholic Art", has Jesus standing the the river, and John pouring water over Him from a bowl.

    However -

    When it comes to "Ceremonal Baptism" in the visible church systems, regardless of "Mode", ONE version is that it's a "Sacrament" that supposedly "Removes original sin" (assuming there is such a thing, AND assuming there such a thing as a "Sacrament. to begin with).

    Another version is that it's an "Ordinance", to be performed ONLY on individuals who have become already been Born Again of the Holy Spirit - because the Bible says to "just do it".

    Since I was Born Again in association with the Southern Baptist system, naturally I was "Immersed". The Baptists were completely satisfied with the ritual, and I felt that I'd been obedient to the Biblical injunction to be baptised - whatever it meant. And 56 years later, I'm still satisfied with it.

    BUT - other that a simplistic "WE SAY SO" from the church, I haven't found any particular Spiritual Significance to the whole thing at all, "Mode" of doing something of unknown value seems to be the least important aspect of the whole thing.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Bob Carabbio View Post

      No problem. One of the MOST IDIOTIC examples of "Catholic Art", has Jesus standing the the river, and John pouring water over Him from a bowl.

      However -

      When it comes to "Ceremonal Baptism" in the visible church systems, regardless of "Mode", ONE version is that it's a "Sacrament" that supposedly "Removes original sin" (assuming there is such a thing, AND assuming there such a thing as a "Sacrament. to begin with).

      Another version is that it's an "Ordinance", to be performed ONLY on individuals who have become already been Born Again of the Holy Spirit - because the Bible says to "just do it".

      Since I was Born Again in association with the Southern Baptist system, naturally I was "Immersed". The Baptists were completely satisfied with the ritual, and I felt that I'd been obedient to the Biblical injunction to be baptised - whatever it meant. And 56 years later, I'm still satisfied with it.

      BUT - other that a simplistic "WE SAY SO" from the church, I haven't found any particular Spiritual Significance to the whole thing at all, "Mode" of doing something of unknown value seems to be the least important aspect of the whole thing.
      Baptism into Christ =_A_TYPE_Of_Burial_&_Circumcision_&_Crucifixion

      BAPTISM IS A TYPE OF BURIAL OF THOSE WHO ARE DEAD TO SIN:
      Rom 6:3 Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus
      Christ were baptized into his death? 4 Therefore we are buried with
      him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the
      dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in
      newness of life.5 For if we have been planted together in the likeness
      of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection:6
      Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of
      sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin.7 For
      he that is dead is freed from sin.

      8 Now if we be dead with Christ, we believe that we shall also live
      with him: 9 Knowing that Christ being raised from the dead dieth no
      more; death hath no more dominion over him. 10 For in that he died, he
      died unto sin once: but in that he liveth, he liveth unto God. 11
      Likewise reckon ye also yourselves to be dead indeed unto sin, but
      alive unto God through Jesus Christ our Lord. 12 Let not sin therefore
      reign in your mortal body, that ye should obey it in the lusts
      thereof.13 Neither yield ye your members as instruments of
      unrighteousness unto sin: but yield yourselves unto God, as those that
      are alive from the dead, and your members as instruments of
      righteousness unto God.

      BAPTISM IS A TYPE OF CIRCUMCISION:
      Col 2:10 And ye are complete in him, which is the head of all
      principality and power: 11 In whom also ye are circumcised with the
      circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins
      of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ: 12 Buried with him in
      baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the
      operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead.

      BAPTISM IS A TYPE OF THE CRUCIFIXION:
      Gal 2:19 For I through the law am dead to the law, that I might live
      unto God. 20 I am crucified with Christ (Rom 6:5) nevertheless I live; yet not
      I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh
      I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me.
      Some of this material has been posted by me on other websites.
      By law, I cannot plagiarize my own work. The burden of proof is on the accuser.
      If you accuse me of plagiarism, you will face it again at the judgment

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Theo Book View Post

        Baptism into Christ =_A_TYPE_Of_Burial_&_Circumcision_&_Crucifixion

        BAPTISM IS A TYPE OF BURIAL OF THOSE WHO ARE DEAD TO SIN:
        Rom 6:3 Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus
        Christ were baptized into his death? 4 Therefore we are buried with
        him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the
        dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in
        newness of life.5 For if we have been planted together in the likeness
        of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection:6
        Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of
        sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin.7 For
        he that is dead is freed from sin.

        8 Now if we be dead with Christ, we believe that we shall also live
        with him: 9 Knowing that Christ being raised from the dead dieth no
        more; death hath no more dominion over him. 10 For in that he died, he
        died unto sin once: but in that he liveth, he liveth unto God. 11
        Likewise reckon ye also yourselves to be dead indeed unto sin, but
        alive unto God through Jesus Christ our Lord. 12 Let not sin therefore
        reign in your mortal body, that ye should obey it in the lusts
        thereof.13 Neither yield ye your members as instruments of
        unrighteousness unto sin: but yield yourselves unto God, as those that
        are alive from the dead, and your members as instruments of
        righteousness unto God.

        BAPTISM IS A TYPE OF CIRCUMCISION:
        Col 2:10 And ye are complete in him, which is the head of all
        principality and power: 11 In whom also ye are circumcised with the
        circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins
        of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ: 12 Buried with him in
        baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the
        operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead.

        BAPTISM IS A TYPE OF THE CRUCIFIXION:
        Gal 2:19 For I through the law am dead to the law, that I might live
        unto God. 20 I am crucified with Christ (Rom 6:5) nevertheless I live; yet not
        I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh
        I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me.
        Yup - those are all the "normal" arguments. But since a Christian has already been "crucified with Christ", has Already "put off the body of sin", and ALREADY buried and risen in newness of life before any "water ceremony" takes place - then is it nothing but a "Show" with no REAL spiritual significance???

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Bob Carabbio View Post

          Yup - those are all the "normal" arguments. But since a Christian has already been "crucified with Christ", has Already "put off the body of sin", and ALREADY buried and risen in newness of life before any "water ceremony" takes place - then is it nothing but a "Show" with no REAL spiritual significance???
          I think of it as more of a booster shot, a reminder of the original.
          Some of this material has been posted by me on other websites.
          By law, I cannot plagiarize my own work. The burden of proof is on the accuser.
          If you accuse me of plagiarism, you will face it again at the judgment

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Theo Book View Post


            CONCLUSION: SPRINKLING AND POURING IS NOT IMMERSIOIN = BAPTISM
            While I agree that sprinkling and pouring is not immersion we will have to disagree that baptism is immersion (or more properly dipping). The word itself doesn't indicate modal action which can only be determined by the context of the surrounding text.

            One thing have I desired of the Lord, that will I seek after; that I may dwell in the house of the Lord all the days of my life, to behold the beauty of the Lord, and to enquire in his temple.



            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by uncleanlips View Post

              While I agree that sprinkling and pouring is not immersion we will have to disagree that baptism is immersion (or more properly dipping). The word itself doesn't indicate modal action which can only be determined by the context of the surrounding text.
              So if I read "Jump into the river" that doesn't require a river?

              Bapsei, Baptw, different form of the word; Baptizw, all mean the same thing; to immerse one in water, or be immersed in the Spirit; or immersed in blood. The word itself is a reference to immersion, as OPPOSED TO sprinkling or pouring.
              Some of this material has been posted by me on other websites.
              By law, I cannot plagiarize my own work. The burden of proof is on the accuser.
              If you accuse me of plagiarism, you will face it again at the judgment

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Bob Carabbio View Post

                No problem. One of the MOST IDIOTIC examples of "Catholic Art", has Jesus standing the the river, and John pouring water over Him from a bowl.

                However -

                When it comes to "Ceremonal Baptism" in the visible church systems, regardless of "Mode", ONE version is that it's a "Sacrament" that supposedly "Removes original sin" (assuming there is such a thing, AND assuming there such a thing as a "Sacrament. to begin with).

                Another version is that it's an "Ordinance", to be performed ONLY on individuals who have become already been Born Again of the Holy Spirit - because the Bible says to "just do it".

                Since I was Born Again in association with the Southern Baptist system, naturally I was "Immersed". The Baptists were completely satisfied with the ritual, and I felt that I'd been obedient to the Biblical injunction to be baptised - whatever it meant. And 56 years later, I'm still satisfied with it.

                BUT - other that a simplistic "WE SAY SO" from the church, I haven't found any particular Spiritual Significance to the whole thing at all, "Mode" of doing something of unknown value seems to be the least important aspect of the whole thing.
                Water is not a "Mode" - Blood is not a "mode" - suffering is not a "mode" of "much water" -

                Sprinkling and pouring are not "modes of Baptism"

                Some of this material has been posted by me on other websites.
                By law, I cannot plagiarize my own work. The burden of proof is on the accuser.
                If you accuse me of plagiarism, you will face it again at the judgment

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Theo Book View Post

                  Water is not a "Mode" - Blood is not a "mode" - suffering is not a "mode" of "much water" -

                  Sprinkling and pouring are not "modes of Baptism"
                  (chuckle) "word games"!!

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Bob Carabbio View Post

                    (chuckle) "word games"!!
                    NOPE!

                    "Word Games" is when folks begin to add "Modes" to Baptism, justifying their activity by using their error as a just cause for adding to God's instruction.

                    Feeling the need to baptize babies so as to make then safe under the waters of Baptism, some added the act of pouring water over the forehead of babies; others added sprinkling water upon the baby.

                    But pouring over and sprinkling on is not IMMERSING IN water.
                    Some of this material has been posted by me on other websites.
                    By law, I cannot plagiarize my own work. The burden of proof is on the accuser.
                    If you accuse me of plagiarism, you will face it again at the judgment

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Theo Book View Post

                      NOPE!

                      "Word Games" is when folks begin to add "Modes" to Baptism, justifying their activity by using their error as a just cause for adding to God's instruction.

                      Feeling the need to baptize babies so as to make then safe under the waters of Baptism, some added the act of pouring water over the forehead of babies; others added sprinkling water upon the baby.

                      But pouring over and sprinkling on is not IMMERSING IN water.
                      Baptism by "Ablution" didn't start with Babies, of course, since as Catholic art indicates, it was also an adult practice (it's easier than immersion, doesn't require the investment in a facility, or a road trip to the local Pond/Lake/River OR a change of clothes and towels.)

                      And of course if you do it on Babies (some still immerse 'em) it's all WORTHLESS ANYWAY so not an issue at all.

                      In MY case, since I was Saved into the Southern Baptist paradigm, they got me in the heated tank QUICKLY (4 days later).

                      They did it as an Ordinance - i.e no particular "Spiritual value to it other than "obedience" to the word, and as a testimony.

                      Which leaves the question open - IS THAT ALL THERE IS TO IT???

                      I don't know.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        The method of baptism (e.g. pouring vs. submission) is never described in the Bible, to settle the literal meaning of baptism. People baptized before eating (Luke 11:38), I don't think anyone submersed themselves before meals. Can we assume they just baptized their hands? But their hands is a bowl of water and dirty all the water, or do better and just pour water on their hands to wash their hands? And, was this pre-meal baptism symbolic of being clean (an actual OT concept)? Something done symbolically, like Christian baptism, can be done in a less complete matter, e.g. sprinkling to clean rather than submersing to clean.

                        Even though submersion-hounds are the same people who lie and say that wine is grape juice, because they don't really care what words mean, I'm willing to agree for arguments sake that baptism means submersion. There's still the symbolic "less complete manner". And, for anyone not a legalist, doing something that is symbolic in this first place, doing it a little differently, such as if full submersion isn't practical, is acceptable.

                        Anyone who says "you're just getting wet" if you're not submersed is a legalist. Anyone demanding someone be baptized because the first baptism wasn't done "right" is a legalist. Faith counts, not details of a ritual -- you'd think Baptists would know this more than anyone. Rebaptism is denial of faith and so is a sin.



                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Ruk View Post
                          The method of baptism (e.g. pouring vs. submission) is never described in the Bible,
                          This is true. The reason for that is the biblical writers rarely if ever defined the words they were using. They just assumed that anyone who spoke the language would know what a word meant. And in this case baptizo means to immerse or submerge in water. Therefore, there is no need to define the word. If the King James translators had translated the word instead of transliterating it they would have translated it as immerse. There are other Greek words that mean pouring or sprinkling. Those words have no etymological connection with the word baptizo.
                          greatdivide46
                          It is honorable for a man to resolve a dispute; but any fool can get himself into a quarrel. -- (Proverbs 20:3).

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by greatdivide46 View Post
                            This is true. The reason for that is the biblical writers rarely if ever defined the words they were using.
                            The Bible numerous times implicitly defines wine as alcohol by speaking of its intoxicating qualities and origin on the vine. In speaking of eschatology, Jesus explicitly defines a word meaning "at hand" (or "near") with his illustration of summer starting when trees start to leaf. Yet, many Baptists outright reject these clear definitions provided by scripture. But, nothing in the Bible tells us the literal meaning of baptism. The word is used for washing your hands before dinner, but I doubt that involves submersion as submersion would dirty the water and make it useless for the next person to wash. In hand washing, pouring makes more sense, so only a little water is dirtied.

                            Yes, the authors of the NT assumed people knew what baptism means. The Didache was written in the first century, and it describes the ritual of baptism with pouring (in the absence of having "living water", a river), and says nothing about submersion. Pour water on the head three times, in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit (vs. Baptists dunking once).

                            Even if right about submersion, Baptists are still legalistic about it (if you innocently did the ritual "wrong" it doesn't count, regardless of your good faith). Even if right about submersion, Baptists are hypocritical about it (vs. wine and at hand, as well as their stated opposition to legalism and ritual). But, there's no proof they're right, which makes them all the more legalistic and hypocritical.

                            They just assumed that anyone who spoke the language would know what a word meant. And in this case baptizo means to immerse or submerge in water. Therefore, there is no need to define the word. If the King James translators had translated the word instead of transliterating it they would have translated it as immerse. There are other Greek words that mean pouring or sprinkling. Those words have no etymological connection with the word baptizo.
                            Why didn't the KJV translate the word, if not for significant doubt about its meaning? Your argument that they would have translated immerse is at most speculation, and at worse nonsense. They were free to translate the word and it was their job to translate the word, and they still didn't translate it to immerse. You seem to assume that they were just being lazy, which is nonsense.

                            "Wash" and "pour" (or dunk or baptize) share no etymological connection, yet they both work to describe what people do for the hands before dinner. Juice and wine share no etymological connection, but Baptists are sure wine and juice are the same thing (except when the Bible warns against abusing wine, then Baptists fall back to their close friend hypocrisy). I wouldn't define "baptism" as "pour", but that doesn't mean pouring isn't baptism. In faith, all things are good, including sprinkling and pouring. Out of faith, all things are bad, including dunking.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Ruk View Post
                              The Bible numerous times implicitly defines wine as alcohol by speaking of its intoxicating qualities and origin on the vine. In speaking of eschatology, Jesus explicitly defines a word meaning "at hand" (or "near") with his illustration of summer starting when trees start to leaf. Yet, many Baptists outright reject these clear definitions provided by scripture. But, nothing in the Bible tells us the literal meaning of baptism.
                              When Sprinkling and pouring are used in the same reference as "dipping" - as when the finger is "dipped" in oil, then sprinkled on the people and the book, as in Lev 14:15-16; we who are capable of comprehending, comprehend the finger has to have been immersed to the point of being overwhelmed, to have enough oil thereupon, to sprinkle profusely, onto s4everal surfaces. It does not take a great imagination to understand sprinkling and pouring are not dipping to the point of saturation or overwhelming.

                              Originally posted by Ruk View Post
                              The word is used for washing your hands before dinner, but I doubt that involves submersion as submersion would dirty the water and make it useless for the next person to wash.
                              I have never seen someone use the same water for washing, as a predecessor used; especially when the predecessor poured it out upon the ground.

                              And when one is baptized in a river because "There is much water there" is exclaimed (John 3:23), the significance becomes appropriate to the conclusion.

                              John 3:23 And John also was baptizing in Aenon near to Salim, because there was much water there: and they came, and were baptized.

                              Originally posted by Ruk View Post
                              In hand washing, pouring makes more sense, so only a little water is dirtied.
                              So "not baptizing" makes more sense than "baptizing" when "hand washing" is the activity under consideration? I can see that.

                              Originally posted by Ruk View Post
                              Yes, the authors of the NT assumed people knew what baptism means. The Didache was written in the first century, and it describes the ritual of baptism with pouring (in the absence of having "living water", a river), and says nothing about submersion.
                              It says nothing about pouring, or sprinkling, but DOES instruct one to "Be baptized;" NOTHING is intimated about water being sprinkled or poured on or over the subject as a substitute for baptism.

                              Originally posted by Ruk View Post
                              Pour water on the head three times, in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit (vs. Baptists dunking once).
                              No such instruction is referenced in scripture.

                              Originally posted by Ruk View Post
                              Why didn't the KJV translate the word, if not for significant doubt about its meaning?
                              Because Lev 14:15-16 left no doubt as to the application to which it belonged.

                              Originally posted by Ruk View Post
                              I wouldn't define "baptism" as "pour", but that doesn't mean pouring isn't baptism.
                              "Pouring Over" is NEVER in scripture used in relation to baptism. Neither is "Sprinkling upon." Immersing to the point of covering over is. The reference to "MUCH WATER" in response to the location "Aenon" which is a reference to a "Double Spring' which is a source to an abundance of moving water, such as the head of a river or stream; certainly adequate to the use of "Baptizing" people.

                              Originally posted by Ruk View Post
                              In faith, all things are good, including sprinkling and pouring. Out of faith, all things are bad, including dunking.
                              "Faith" is based upon evidence, not contrary speculation. And it is never a matter of faith for one to substitute words to mean something other than the meaning applied by scripture.

                              Pouring and sprinkling are NEVER a substitute for Baptism.
                              Some of this material has been posted by me on other websites.
                              By law, I cannot plagiarize my own work. The burden of proof is on the accuser.
                              If you accuse me of plagiarism, you will face it again at the judgment

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X