Subject: Which method of baptism Bible supported? |
Bible Note: Matthew 3:16 and Acts 8:38-39 do not mean immersion. Did John the Baptist baptized in the Jordan River because there was much water there? The Bible speaks of the baptism of Jesus in Matthew 3:16: And Jesus, when he was baptized, went up straightway out of the water: and, lo, the heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove, and lighting upon him. Does this verse teach without question that Jesus went up out of the water, and, therefore, He must have been immersed? This verse does not speak of immersion. This verse says He went up out of the water. How must we understand this phrase? The Biblical rule is that we are to seek help from the Bible. Doing so, we come to Acts 8:38-39, where the Bible describes the water baptism of the Ethiopian eunuch. We read there: And he commanded the chariot to stand still: and they went down both into the water, both Philip and the eunuch; and he baptized him. And when they were come up out of the water, the Spirit of the Lord caught away Philip, that the eunuch saw him no more: and he went on his way rejoicing. Notice that verse 39 speaks of coming up out of the water which is the very same phrase that describes Jesus going up out of the water. What does verse 38 say? It says, "they went down both into the water, both Philip and the eunuch." Whatever action the eunuch took was an exact duplicate of that which Philip took. They both went down into the water. To make sure that we have not misunderstood, the emphasis is added, both Philip and the eunuch. Therefore, if going down into the water implies immersion, then we must conclude that Philip immersed himself at the same time he immersed the eunuch. Such a conclusion, of course, makes no sense. God is simply teaching that there was a body of water, and that Philip and the eunuch both went down the bank into the water. There they stood ankle deep or knee deep (how deep is altogether unimportant), and Philip baptized the eunuch. Later in our study, we will see that the Bible suggests the mode of baptism, and it will not be immersion. Therefore, if going down into the water implies immersion, then we must conclude that Philip immersed himself at the same time he immersed the eunuch. Jesus had to be ceremonially washed before He could do the work of the High Priest. He was not only the Lamb that was offered, but He was also the High Priest. Do you recall that the priests were ceremonially washed before they ministered at the altar. Exodus 30:18-21: Thou shalt also make a laver of brass, and his foot also of brass, to wash withal: and thou shalt put it between the tabernacle of the congregation and the altar, and thou shalt put water therein. For Aaron and his sons shall wash their hands and their feet thereat: When they go into the tabernacle of the congregation, they shall wash with water, that they die not; or when they come near to the altar to minister, to burn offering made by fire unto the LORD: So they shall wash their hands and their feet, that they die not: and it shall be a statute for ever to them, even to him and to his seed throughout their generations. The priests hands and feet were washed. That was the washing Jesus had to experience before ministering at the altar of sacrifice. Thus, we would not in any way expect that Jesus was immersed when He was baptized. Read my Mark 7:4, Luke 11:38, Hebrews 9:10 post. BTW this is a minor point. |