aspen
“"The harvest is plentiful but the workers are few
babies naturally know how to hold their breathe. And no babies are not required to be immersed - nor are adults.
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Every meaning for Baptism, Is by total immersion..So what this nonsense about no one is required to be immersed??.aspen2 said:babies naturally know how to hold their breathe. And no babies are not required to be immersed - nor are adults.
Wormwood said:Mungo,
Even if baptism foreshadows the purification rites of Levites and so forth, this does not change the clear communication of the mode of baptism. Baptism means immersion. You have yet to adequately explain this very clear concept away.
I already responded to these statements, but I will address them more specifically if you like.
Prepositions matter. If I say I sat on a house it means quite a different thing than if I said I sat in a house. The virgin in (actually its Gen. 24:16) your text went down (epi - literally "upon") the spring filled the jar and came up." This is quite different from going down (eis) "into" the water and then coming out. So, other than this verse talking about someone going down to a body of water, there is no connection here as one gets on a spring to fill up a jar and the other goes into water to be "immersed/baptized."
Well, if we take the text literally, they came up out of the water. Perhaps they walked out from under the water in the dream and stopped in the reed grass to eat while the others came up out of the water and just stood by the former. It's a dream...not unlike Johns vision of a beast coming out of the water in revelation. Are you suggesting the beast did not come up out of the water but merely was splashing around in the shallow water? If the text says something came up out of the water, then we must assume that thing was in the water and quite possibly submerged in the water just as if I said, "I came up out of the water." Your first impression would be that I was entirely immersed, but if I give you further detail to suggest that I was only wading in water and I walked out of it then I would provide further clarity to the former statement.
The passage in 1 Cor.... yes, they were "immersed" in Moses. Clearly this is a figurative use where the passing through water and cloud suggests they, by passing through that water, had become united with Moses. So what if they passed by on dry land! They went through water and this is a figurative baptism that is related to the baptism of Christ that brings us out of slavery. Are you suggesting we not use water at all because they walked on dry land?? You are straining for a gnat here.
The Septuagint rendering I have uses αὐλίζω which means to find lodging or live in. "In the dew of heaven you will find lodging"
I see no word for baptism here. I'll look more when I have time.
Actually there is proof of this... The proof is the Greek word itself "Baptize" means to immerse, dip or plunge.. But clearly you have a way of proving this does not apply to you and your traditions.. So in all honesty, how hard is it to understand? The very name itself Baptize tells us what we ought to do. Why would I need Scriptures to tell me what a word actually means? Would you need Scripture to understand what the word flood means? It's common sense - some just refuse to accept it because of their traditions...Baptism: Why immersion ONLY is wrong
Point 1.
Scripture doesn’t say that baptism is only by immersion. There is no proof from scripture.
The early catholic church might have sprinkled, But the TRUE Church never has sprinkled, Or poured... You might know the history of the catholic church, But you don't know anything about the true Church.aspen2 said:Alan the Early Church sprinkled. if you claim to share your beliefs and practices with the Early Christian Church, you need to review your history.
As you say Baptise comes from the Greek word baptizo which means immerse or dip or plunge, though it can also have a wider meaning. However I think it is wrong to treat baptizo as simply a Greek word with various meanings. It is the name of a Jewish, and later Christian, ritual and therefore expresses the meaning of the ritual and not of all the Greek possibilities.Atonement said:Greetings to you in the love of Jesus
I just wanted to touch on the very first point you made
Actually there is proof of this... The proof is the Greek word itself "Baptize" means to immerse, dip or plunge.. But clearly you have a way of proving this does not apply to you and your traditions.. So in all honesty, how hard is it to understand? The very name itself Baptize tells us what we ought to do. Why would I need Scriptures to tell me what a word actually means? Would you need Scripture to understand what the word flood means? It's common sense - some just refuse to accept it because of their traditions...
But what's more important? Your heart! I don't believe God will reject those who gave their heart to Him because of a tradition that has been passed down. God looks at the heart, and if you feel that you were properly baptized and you feel in your heart that you're right with God. God won't reject you. But to teach others that Baptism is not about immersion, goes against the Word of God because that is false..
One must first learn a little Greek and learn to understand the meaning of words before they tell others they are facts.. Because here is a fact: Baptism means to immerse, dip or plunge, this is fact! You have the Internet and the knowledge at your fingertips - You can not disagree with the meaning of a word to fit some theology. You must question your theology to verify if in fact it's in the correct line with the Word of God.
God Bless
The DidacheAlanforchrist said:The early catholic church might have sprinkled, But the TRUE Church never has sprinkled, Or poured... You might know the history of the catholic church, But you don't know anything about the true Church.
Mungo said:As you say Baptise comes from the Greek word baptizo which means immerse or dip or plunge, though it can also have a wider meaning. However I think it is wrong to treat baptizo as simply a Greek word with various meanings. It is the name of a Jewish, and later Christian, ritual and therefore expresses the meaning of the ritual and not of all the Greek possibilities.
Well of course you would think that -
I gave you all three meanings of the word, there are no other meanings of the original Greek word - none, zilch, zero, nada -
But if you want here is the meanings again..
You can also look up Strong's #907 for another reference
- to dip repeatedly, to immerse, to submerge (of vessels sunk)
- to cleanse by dipping or submerging, to wash, to make clean with water, to wash one's self, bathe
- to overwhelm
Again you should be questioning your theology and not try to change the meaning of the original word to fit your theology. That's just being obtuse
Why are you ignoring all the points I made about the use of the word?Atonement said:As you say Baptise comes from the Greek word baptizo which means immerse or dip or plunge, though it can also have a wider meaning. However I think it is wrong to treat baptizo as simply a Greek word with various meanings. It is the name of a Jewish, and later Christian, ritual and therefore expresses the meaning of the ritual and not of all the Greek possibilities.
Well of course you would think that -
I gave you all three meanings of the word, there are no other meanings of the original Greek word - none, zilch, zero, nada -
But if you want here is the meanings again..
You can also look up Strong's #907 for another reference
- to dip repeatedly, to immerse, to submerge (of vessels sunk)
- to cleanse by dipping or submerging, to wash, to make clean with water, to wash one's self, bathe
- to overwhelm
Again you should be questioning your theology and not try to change the meaning of the original word to fit your theology. That's just being obtuse
Because it's useless to read your points on this word. By reading all your explanations is just trying to change the fact that the meaning has changed, when in fact it hasn't.Mungo said:Why are you ignoring all the points I made about the use of the word?
Three points on the meaningAtonement said:Because it's useless to read your points on this word. By reading all your explanations is just trying to change the fact that the meaning has changed, when in fact it hasn't.
You bring up the Holy Spirit even.. I mean really? Because I know what the word means this tells me they were immersed in the Spirit.. Or just like if I were to say - I was immersed in my school work all weekend and I couldn't get away -
Immersed
- Dip or submerge in a liquid.
- Involve oneself deeply in a particular interest: "immersed in her work".
Again I did not recap on all that you wrote, because really what's the point? I know and understand literature
Not a single one of these attributes to the meaning of the word, can, nor will ever suffice to sprinkling of water as a baptism - NEVER!Mungo said:Three points on the meaning
1. It always had a wider meaning than you are allowing which my examples show. You are just in denial of that.
2. It's the name of a Jewish and Christians ritual and therefore has the meaning ascribed to it by Jews and Christians. Assuming the a pagan word continues to have the only pagan meanings when they are used in a religious context is simply wrong.
3. Your example of "immersed in work" (for immersed) shows that it has a wider meaning than the etymology would suggest.
early 15c. (implied in immersed), from Latin immersus, past participle of immergere "to plunge in, dip into" (see immersion). Related: Immersed; immersing; immersive. (Online etymology dictionary).
Immersion doesn't have a wider meaning, It mean, "Immersion, Submersion".Mungo said:Three points on the meaning
1. It always had a wider meaning than you are allowing which my examples show. You are just in denial of that.
2. It's the name of a Jewish and Christians ritual and therefore has the meaning ascribed to it by Jews and Christians. Assuming the a pagan word continues to have the only pagan meanings when they are used in a religious context is simply wrong.
3. Your example of "immersed in work" (for immersed) shows that it has a wider meaning than the etymology would suggest.
early 15c. (implied in immersed), from Latin immersus, past participle of immergere "to plunge in, dip into" (see immersion). Related: Immersed; immersing; immersive. (Online etymology dictionary).
It's not scriptural. You are not relying on scripture but on your personal interpretation of the meaning of the Greek word.Atonement said:Not a single one of these attributes to the meaning of the word, can, nor will ever suffice to sprinkling of water as a baptism - NEVER!
It does not hold a candle to the meaning at all, in any shape or form.
I don't have to question my theology because I know where it stands, if you decide not to question yours, that's fine. But you can't come tell us that it's not Scriptural because then you are BOLD face lying..
Yoiu are ignoring the examples I gave where baptise does not mean immersion.Alanforchrist said:Immersion doesn't have a wider meaning, It mean, "Immersion, Submersion".
Every Greek meaning for baptism is, by total immersion, You'll just have to face the fact that your not baptised.
Actually, the early church immersed. If you want to go possibly to the second century and more prominently to the third and fourth century that's when sprinkling was introduced. So if you mean early church as in hundreds of years later, then I guess early is a relative term. The early church built baptistries for immersion. Its an archeological fact.aspen2 said:Alan the Early Church sprinkled. if you claim to share your beliefs and practices with the Early Christian Church, you need to review your history.
Actually the early church used Jewish mikvahs. That's how Peter & the apostles baptised 3,000 people at Pentecost. Excavations in the Temple Mount area show there were 48 mikvahs there.Wormwood said:Actually, the early church immersed. If you want to go possibly to the second century and more prominently to the third and fourth century that's when sprinkling was introduced. So if you mean early church as in hundreds of years later, then I guess early is a relative term. The early church built baptistries for immersion. Its an archeological fact.
The Didache is a second century document. Even it makes pouring a last resort in extenuating circumstances.
If the Didache is a somewhat problematic work and its dating is anything but certain. Some claim it to be 1st century, but in my estimation more seem to view it as either early 2nd century or even later than that.A mikveh must, according to the classical regulations, contain enough water to cover the entire body of an average-sized person; based on a mikveh with the dimensions of 3 cubits long, 1 cubit wide, and 1 cubit deep, the necessary volume of water was estimated as being 40 seah of water...
The classical requirement for full immersion was traditionally interpreted as requiring water to literally touch every part of the body, and for this reason all clothing, jewellery, and even bandages must be removed; in a contemporary mikveh used by women, there is usually an experienced attendant, commonly called the mikveh lady, to watch the immersion and ensure that the woman has been entirely covered in water. -Wikipedia
The Didache is a problematical work, consisting of teaching (which appears in other works) on the ways of life and of death, a brief church order, dealing with baptism, fasting, prayer, eucharist, ministers and prophets, and closing with an apocalypse. It has many peculiar features, according exactly neither with church order in the NT nor with what we know of the 2nd-century church. It has been argued that it is a genuine early work (e.g. J. P. Audet, La Didachi, 1958, dates it ad 60), that it is a late-2nd-century reconstruction, or that it represents a church out of the main stream. It seems to be Syrian. -NBD