Baptism Part 1

The argument over baptism contains just two parts:

• The mode of baptism—There are two ways to baptize: immersion or sprinkling (though the argument is not immersion vs. sprinkling). There are people who believe in immersion exclusively and those who believe it can be done either way.
  
• The recipients of baptism—Again, there are two sides, those for believer’s baptism (adults only, which I’ll refer to in this series as baptists) and paedobaptists, those who believe in infant baptism. Paedobaptists do not exclusively baptize infants. I, and all reformed believers that I am aware of, are not against dunking an adult who has never been baptized.

Up front, I have to say I spent most of my Christian life in a baptist church. Now, I am reformed and believe in paedobaptism. If you are a paedobaptist and disagree with something I write in this series, please bring it to my attention. I am open to the possibility that I may err. This is new ground for me, and I hope to tackle this subject with as much humility and grace as the Lord will give me. I am aware of many baptists who read this blog, and was even prompted by one to do this series, so if anyone feels I am not being fair or gracious, please bring that to my attention, also.

I would like to begin with a quote from John Murray about how we derive our doctrine and beliefs:

"Traditional sentiment can never be pleaded as the proper ground for any element of the worship of the church of God. Divine institution is the only warrant."
Westminster Theological Seminary, Westminster Theological Journal Volume 13, 13:105 (Westminster Theological Seminary, 1950; 2003).


We must be careful to draw all of our beliefs and practices from scripture and not impose our traditions and pet doctrines onto what we read. We all do this at times. I occasionally do it, sometimes even knowingly. I will attempt to be fair and honest with the texts in this series; let's see where that takes us.

One of the baptist arguments I hear often is that Jesus went down into and came up out of the water, indicating that he was immersed. I will not engage this argument, because John's baptism and Jesus' baptism are two different things, just as John's ministry differed from Jesus' ministry:

3 And he said, “Into what then were you baptized?” And they said, “Into John’s baptism.”
4 Paul said, “John baptized with the baptism of repentance, telling the people to believe in Him who was coming after him, that is, in Jesus.”
5 When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.
New American Standard Bible : 1995 Update, Ac 19:3-5 (LaHabra, CA: The Lockman Foundation, 1995).

John's ministry was preparatory and transitional, and so was his baptism. Therefore, we cannot derive from John's baptism what must be practiced today in our baptisms.

We also see many other baptisms in scripture. During Jesus' ministry we see his disciples baptizing (John 3:22, 26; 4:1, 2), John's baptism previously mentioned, baptism into Moses (1 Cor. 10:2), baptizing into Paul (1 Cor. 1:13), and finally Matt 28:

19 “Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit,"
New American Standard Bible : 1995 Update, Mt 28:19 (LaHabra, CA: The Lockman Foundation, 1995).

So, what we see is important in these verses is the difference in the meaning, not the mode or method, of baptism. What is clear is that baptism must be done in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit. This is the command Jesus gave to the apostles; he did not say, “Immerse them, and do not sprinkle them.” Be sure to notice whom Jesus gives this command to, as it will be important later in our discussion.

My goal in this series will be to find the lowest common denominator at the end of each post. I think I have achieved that in this post, because the only conclusion I have drawn, baptists and paedobaptists will agree with.

1. Baptism is to be done in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit.