Immersion - David Lim

Immersion for water Baptism?

Is water Baptism by immersion, submersion, sprinkling, smearing or pouring?
The Bible is regarded as the Word of God, the Old and New Testament/covenant.
The Lord God (YHWH) has spoken! Who can but prophesy? ( Amos 3v8, 7v15, Ezk 37v12, Matt 26v68, Acts 2v18 )
The other writings and law books are not regarded with the same authority. They are not the decree of YHWH God.
Often immersionists turn to extra-biblical sources for practices of immersion.
Let us examine the teachings of the Bible and follow that which has initiated the ritual, has authority and final authority.
The word "Immersion" is not found in the Old Testament.
Neither Moses nor any law giver stated anything about immersion.
The word "Dip" is found in the Old Testament ( NT Greek bapto translated to dip, to baptise ).
In no instance has it been used for dipping the whole human body or any object completely. So again, there is no regulation for immersion.

The word "Dipped" is also found in the Old Testament.
2Kings 5v14:
So he (Naaman) went down and dipped himself seven times in the Jordan, according to the word of the man of God;...
Here, we have a ritual of dipping/immersing oneself into live water (the running River jordan), for the cleansing of physical illness.
This is considered a washing. (2Kings 5v13)
This is ordered by the man of God, the prophet Elisha rather than Moses. It is an isolated incident, not recognised to be complying with any common law of God. Baptism on the other hand is not an isolated requirement, but applies to all who enter into witness by baptism.
Bathing and washing do not require immersion. Submersion take place almost all the time.
Naaman could have dipped his toes in and out seven times and it would still be considered a ritual of washing.
2 Kings 5v10:
And Elisha sent a messenger to him, saying, " Go and wash in the Jordan seven times, and your flesh shall be restored to you and you shall be clean."
So, it was not a ritual of initiation, or for spiritual cleansing; but about washing and physical healing.

The word "WASH" is heavily used in the Old Testament.
Ex 29v4:
"Then you shall bring Aaron and his sons to the doorway of the tent of meeting, and wash them with water."
No baptistry/bath tub was mentioned. This washing is likely to be pouring or sprinkling of water rather than of any form of dipping/submersion or immersion. No great system of water work is commanded by Moses in regard to immersion as cleansing ritual for the leviticus priests who numbered many. Immersion of many required much live water. And no water work is recorded in temple building.
Ex 19v10:
The Lord also said to Moses, "Go to the people and consecrate them today and tomorrow, and let them wash their garments;
This is meant to be a temporary cleansing of garments, as the washed garments would not stay clean forever; and the verse mentioned that they were consecrated for three days for the coming down of the Lord.
Immersionists have to show that there were abundance of water for clothes washing.
Cleansing by sprinkling requires little water, and the ritual could be carried out daily with much less consumption of water.
Ex 30v19:
"And Aaron and his sons shall wash their hands and their feet from it;
This can be dipping in of hands and feet. But in order not to conteminate the water, it is most likely that water was poured onto their hands and feet as a ritual cleansing.
Immersionists have to show that there are indeed writings for immersing these parts of the body.
Ex 30v18:
"You shall also make a laver of bronze, with its base of bronze, for washing; and you shall put it between the tent of meeting and the altar, and you shall put water in it.
A bronze container is rather heavy. The users cannot all dip into a little container and still keep a water source (without running water) clean.
This suggests that pouring of a small amount of water, or even sprinkling is required here.
No water work for flowing water is mentioned here. No drain mentioned for emptying the container.
No mentioning of the immersed to be lifted into the container and water for immersion. They just have to cleanse themselves.
Ex 30v21:
"So they shall wash their hands and their feet, that they may not die; and it shall be a perpetual statute for them, for Aaron (him) and his descendants (seeds) throughout their generations."
This is related to Ex 40v12.
The washing of hands and feet does not constitute immersion of the whole body.
This is a perpetual statute and would last throughout the (remaining of time) generations of Levitical priests.
Lv 1v9,13:
Its entrails, however, and its legs he shall wash with water...
The washing of entrails and legs could be done by immersion or pouring water over.
Since there is no mentioning of separating the legs from the body, immersion would cause the body to be washed as well. This is not ordered here. So immersion is ruled out.
Lv 6v27:
..blood splashes on a garment, in a holy place you shall wash what was splashed on.
Here the washing could be done by immersion.
Lv 11v25, 28 , 40, is about washing of clothes. And the person with the garments was regarded unclean even after the garment is washed.
Immersion of the unclean person does not purify him.
Lv 13v6, 34 - after the pronounciation of the priest that the people is clean, he still has to wash his clothes to be clean. Here we have the idea that the cleansing of garments and the body is two separate matter though related.
Lv 13v54 - Quarantine for 7 days required even after washing.
Lv 14v8:
"The one to be cleansed shall then wash his clothes and shave off all his hair, and bathe in water and be clean. Now afterward, he may enter the camp, but he shall stay outside his tent for 7 days.
Here washing clothes is not enough to be cleansed. The act of shaving and bathing (could be immersion) in water is required. And it still requires 7 days before the the people is regarded normal again.
Lv 14v9:
"And it will be on the 7th day that he shall shave off all his hair: he shall shave his head and his beard and his eyebrows, even all his hair. He shall then wash his clothes and bathe his body (flesh) in water and be clean.
Even 7 days is not enough. The person has to shave and wash his garments and bathe his body again to be clean. Here, washing does not cleanse instantly.
If this were to signify baptism, more than one baptism is shown to be necessary. And immersion would have no significance for instant cleanliness.
Lv 14v47 is for washing clothes.
Lv 15v5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 11, 21, 22, 27, Lv 17v15; Nu 19v7, 8, 10 is requiring washing clothes and bathing body and a day to be clean again.
This could signify that baptism for regeneration takes time apart from ritual/outward witness. Same requirement under different situation.
Lv 15v13:
Now when the man with the discharge becomes cleansed from his discharge, then he shall count off for himself 7 days for his cleansing; he shall then wash his clothes and bathe his body in running (living) water and shall become clean.
A very interesting picture here. When healed without a human agent, the person could count for a period himself, and then perform the washing ceremony himself and becomes clean immediately.
So, when a person is forgiven of sin, he should wait on the Lord for a set period, perform what is required and be regarded clean immediately.
So, a repentant person could be pronounced clean immediately after baptism.
Note that running water is mentioned/required here.
Lv 16v26:
And the one who released the goat as the scapegoat (goat of removal - Azazel) shall wash his clothes and bathe his body (flesh) with water; then afterward he shall come into the camp.
Washing the flesh could be a ceremonial pouring of water over the flesh/skin.
The person is not said to be unclean at any time although he still has to wash his clothes and bathe the flesh. He can come into the camp without any probation. His sins and uncleanliness was carried away by the scapegoat. he is just washing off that which is outside of the body.
Lv 16v28 tells us that the one who burned the offerings shall be cleansed immediately after the washing ceremony.
Lv 17v16 tells us that iniquity remains on the person who does not wash his garments or bathe his body. Therefore the removal of iniquity depends on the washings.
Nu 5v23 tells us that the washing (blot out) of water can transfer punishment.
Nu 8v7:
And thus you shall do to them, for their cleansing: sprinkle purifying (water of sin) water on them, and let them use a razor ( cause to pass ) over their whole body (flesh), and wash their clothes, and they shall be clean.
This is one of the proof verse for the doctrine of sprinkling.
The body is regarded clean without immersing in a large quantity of water.
The procedure of ritual is described in the bible. The ritual for immersion is not recorded in the bible.
Nu 19vv 18,9:
And a clean person shall take hyssop and dip it in the water, and sprinkle it on the tent and on all the furnishings and on the persons who were there, and on the one who touched the bone or the one slain or the one dying naturally or the grave.
The the clean person shall sprinkle on the unclean on the third day and on the 7th day; and on the 7th day he shall purify him from uncleanness and he shall wash his clothes and bathe himself in water and shall be clean by evening.
Another proof verse for sprinkling. It is performed by a clean person who himself needs bathing after performing his task. And his bathing does not bring forth instant cleanliness. Immersionism requires the verse to speak of instant cleanliness by bathing.
This context tells of the co-existence of the 2 cleansing ritual; one for the clean and the other for the unclean. Sprinkling was required for the unclean.
Nu 19v 20:
But the man who is unclean and does not purify himself from uncleanness, that person shall be cut off from the midst of the assembly, because he has defiled the sanctuary of the Lord; the water for impurity has not been sprinkled on him, he is unclean.
The sprinkling of water is essential for removal of (spiritual) impurity.
The term "assembly" is also used to refer to the Christian church/fellowship.
The verse tells us that certain people are to be cut off from the assembly. Therefore, it is not automatic/natural/lawful that everybody should and must enter and remain in the assembly/church perpetually.
Nu 19v 21:
So it shall be a perpetual statute for them. And he who sprinkles the water for impurity shall wash his clothes, and he who touches the water for impurity shall be unclean until evening.
The sprinkler himself is required for bathing here since he would touch the water by proximity.
Nu 31v24 tells of washing clothes on the 7th day and be clean.
Dt 21v6 talks of the washing of hands over the heifer.
This is likely to be sprincling/pouring of water rather than dipping or immersion. There is hardly any running/living water over the heifer. So we have a proof verse for cleansing by sprinkling/pouring of water.
Coming out of the law books of Moses, we reach Ru3v3, 1Sam 25v41, 2Sam 11v8 for physical bathing/washing,
2Ch 4v6:
He also made 10 basins in which to wash, and he set 5 on the right side and 5 on the left, to ( in which to ) rinse things for the burnt offering; but the sea was for the priests to wash in.
Here we could have dipping and immersion for cleansing if physical contact with the water in the basins does not count as contaminating the water. This is unlikely, as the law mentions so many situation of transfer of sin by contact.
These basins could be regarded as baptistry (mikvaot). There could be device built in to keep water running. Sadly such devices are not mentioned. Guess work is not good enough for a ritual that requires certainty.
The priests probably needed to be set apart and a large basin, so big as to be termed "the sea" is provided for their bathing/immersion. Again, no immersion ritual is mentioned. It is unimaginable that a band of priests immersing themselves in a container of water smaller than a swimming pool can keep the water fresh and clean.
Job 9v30 - washing with snow is related to cleanliness of snow.
Job 14v19 - washing refers to carrying (flooded) away.
Ps 26v6 - washing his hands in innocence could refer to sprinkling/ pouring water over/dipping/bathing/immersing. The Psalmist is probably so zealous as to choose bathing/immersion.
Ps 51v2, 7 - refers to whatever necessary according to the law. V1 uses "blot out" to relate to the need of floods of water for the cleansing. This depicts the seriousness of sin understood by the Psalmist. However, immersion does not bring out the picture of floods of water.
Ps 58v10:
The righteous ... will wash his feet in the blood of the wicked.
An action relating to dipping even immersing.
Is 1v16 - "Wash yourselves" refers to the required cleansing of the law.
Jer 2v22:
Although you wash yourself with lye, and use much soap, The stain of your iniquity is before Me - declares Je God.
This verse relates to the physical bathing/washing with natural cleaning agent/detergent, for the removal of iniquity.
It suggest that bathing in some way (not serious cases) can remove iniquity.
Jer 4v14:
Wash your heart from evil, O Jerusalem, That you may be saved...
This washing could be regarded as baptism which is related to cleansing necessary for salvation.
And again, the term used for flooding out with water is used here, signifying the carrying away of evil.

Matt 6v17 - washing related to physical cleansing.
Matt 15v2 - relates to ceremonial washing required by the OT law.
Mark 7v3,4:
For the Pharisees and all the Jews do not eat unless they carefully (with the fist) wash their hands, thus observing the traditions of the elders;
and when they come from the market place, they do not eat unless they cleanse (sprinkle) themselves and there are many other things which they have received in order to observe, such as the washing (baptising) of cups and pitchers and copper pots.
Here we have the traditions of the elders being expounded and practiced to date.
Intertesting to see that both sprinking and baptising/dipping could be parts of the cleansing ritual. Sprinkling which requires less water is used for cleansing the body and dipping/immersion is for utensils. The question arises in how the basin of water defiled by dipping in the dirty utensils can regenerate itself all the time for other utensils to be cleansed in.
Jesus did not teach it is wrong to cleanse the body and the utility items, He taught that they are not essential or having priority over the cleansing of the heart and the worship of the Almighty God.

Jews in Judaism, such as the Dead Sea sect practiced immersion as a cleansing ritual; and baptistry (mikvaot) can be found in a number of Jewish settlement.
Some Jewish texts also stated clearly the matter of Jewish baptism, such as the size of baptistry.
D: As stated earlier such practices are not following the teachings of the Bible which has prior and final authority.
The Jewish baptistries are vertical containers not found in residential areas or synagogues. The size of such baptistries being too small for horizontally laying in of bodies for immersion. Jewish baptism is a vertical motion. John 9v7, 11 - refers to ritual cleansing by sending the blind to the pool of Sent (Siloam).
This is likely to be submersion, touching the water.
John 13v5, 6 - The washing of the disciples' feet is likely to be pouring on of water rather than immersion, for it is not nice to wash 12 pairs of feet in a utensil full (basin) of water.
The towel was for drying rather than for wetting.
Jn 13v6 is depicted as physical cleansing.
John 13v7,8 - Jesus suggested that it is part of the initiation into His plan.
John 13v9 - Simon Peter thought of the washing as a spiritual/ritual for cleansing and asked Jesus to thoroughly cleanse him from head to toe.
John 13v10:
Jesus said to him, "He who has bathed needs only to wash his feet, but is completely clean; and you are clean, but not all of you."
If bathing is represented by baptism by immersion, then the washing of feet is also a ritual for cleansing of sin/iniquity. This idea is deduced because Jesus followed by saying that you are clean, but not all of you - hinting Judas. Also, everybody would be regarded physically clean if it is a matter of physical washing. Judas would have had physically bathed with the others.
This then, becomes the proof text for baptism by immersion.
However Jesus declared that the head is already cleansed through bathing but the feet need to be washed both physically and spiritually again; this would mean that the spiritual bathing does not include washing the feet; otherwise the feet would have been washed/bathed twice. Thus ruling out immersion.
Jn 13v14 refers feet washing as a service the disciples should perform to one another.
Acts 22v16:
And now why do you delay? Arise, and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on His name.
Here we have the meaning of baptism, which is for washing away ones sins.
And the thing necessary for the one who is baptised and having his sins washed away is to call on His name in baptism. This fits in with the idea of causing to be baptised.
Acts 9v17-19 - We found no baptistry in any residential site. So immersion is not some ritual that can be carried at home. Paul neith ate nor drank for three days (v9) prior to his bastism. He would have been a very weak person and he was strengthened (v19) after he took food, after he was baptised. This ruled out (no description) the going to the public or to the sea or river for immersion. Ananias was not likely to have lifted Paul up and down into a standing baptistry at home or carried him to a public baptistry or to the river for immersion and then helped him moved his weak body home for food. So immersion is ruled out and sprinkling is much more likely as the way Paul was baptised. And he would have carried on this tradition he knew when he baptised other believers into Christ.

Rv 22v14 - refers to having cleansed (having robes washed). This is a narration of imputed righteousness. And imputation does not require full immersion.
The term bapto - to dip was reputed to be used as cleansing the clothes by fulling. This express the sense of imputation (putting the white on dirty clothings).

For "WASHINGS" in Heb 6v2, Heb 9v10 we see that there were more than one kind/type of ceremonial washing known to the contemporary from their religious practices.
Heb 9v10 - various washings (baptismos) - related to baptism.

In Jesus' baptism by John:
Matthew and Luke did not tell us how water was applied.
Mark told us (in Mk 1v10) that immediately coming up out of the water that Jesus was coming out of the water without assistance. This picture is inconsistent with modern immersion which required the baptiser to lift the believers into the water.
This picture matches the scene depicted by a wall painting in a 2nd Century AD catacomb; that John the Baptist stood on the bank of the River Jordan, and Jesus (immersed himself?)in the water.
The mode of Jewish Baptism described in extra-biblical Jewish tradition tells us that the person, caused to be baptised, should lower himself into the water of the baptistry [ vertically, rather than being laid horizontally ]. The person can easily rise out of the water in this position. No human physical assistance is necessary.
This vertically rising also match the idea that the person being baptised is dying with Christ (vertically); Although the often quoted passage in Romans 6v4 mentioned - having been buried with Christ through baptism should be symbolised by a horizontal position; the part where Christ was raised from the dead could be symbolised by the vertically up-rising.
Going in under the water does produce difficulty in symbolism; for people (including Christ) at that time were not buried underground. They were laid in tombs hewn out from rock faces. It seems that modern people lacking historical understanding are making out a ritual that resemble their contemporary romantic view of death and burial.
Rm 6v6 - the crucifying of the old self is closely represented by the vertically lowering of the body (rather than being laid horizontally).
The spiritual self is crucified from sin, but the physical self has not been crucified like that of Christ. Christians are not physically nailed to wooden crosses at baptism. So, it is far-fetched to take the notion that the physical body is crucified with Christ at baptism. But the believer is re-generated spiritually, having died to sin and bonded to Christ. A baptism signifying this new beginning of having sin washed away is appropiate.
The touching of the lip with a burning coal from the altar of God cleansed the sin of the person/prophet Isaiah (Isa 6vv6,7). There was no need for a thorough burning of the body in coal fire.
Just as the laying of hands, the anointing of oil represent conference, the holding of right hand represents fellowship, the body, even just the hair or head in contact with water is enough representation of sin washed away. A little contact is sufficient to confer forgiveness.
Circumcision is also the cutting off of a small part. There is no need to cut the person into two equal halves to symbolise a cut/covenant. Ceremony of covenant is symbolic in small deed/action rather than matching everything with likeness.

Acts 8v38:
..and they both went down into the water, Philip as well as the eunuch; and he baptised him.
This verse tells us that much water and living water was used for baptism.
The person/eunuch to be baptised went into the water.
Some water could have been taken/scooped up for baptism by sprinkling or pouring if the mode allows little water to be used.
This verse tells us not to reject the practice/idea of having lots of water for baptism. Yet it does not supply clear indication for immersion, as submersion is not immersion.
In Acts 16v15, the baptism of the household of the jailer would run into severe trouble if much living water is essential for baptism, so much as to cover the heads of each individual. Baptistry containing water at least 3 cupits high has not been a common utility container, or found in residential areas. Baptism has been referred to by Christ as bathing in Jn 13v10. So bath-tubs would work if the stipulation in Jewish extra-biblical document is not followed. Leaving out the only record for baptistry and immersion, we have need for other authoritative document. Also bath-tubs are not found in residential areas. And no one can be immersed in water jars (smaller than the size of an adult) used to contain liquids in those days.
So, immersionists have a lot to answer for.

Further reflection on non-immersion:
John 1v25 - And they asked him (John the baptist), and said to him, "Why then are you baptizing, if you are not the Christ, nor Elijah, nor the Prophet?"
This passage shows us the customary belief in Jesus' time for baptism is the sign of:
1) the Christ - Christ Jesus baptised and did not deny His Godhood/deity and claimed to be the Son of God (Jn 6v 35,46,47), Him, that I AM, the one who gives living water(John 4v14), absolutely egocentric. The sign fits Him and His profession. It does not fit the teacher of righteous and the essenes. In fact, none of the essenes claimed to be the Messiah.
2) Elijah - The OT even indicates that Elijah [in spirit] will be sent before the Christ (Mal 3v1; Mal 4v5 - the 2 verses appears in the same book, refering to the same messenger who is like Elijah; and John clothed like Elijah and acted righteously, fitting the image of an important prophet). If the baptiser failed to be the Christ, then the next possible candidate that fits the picture would be Elijah.
Elijah, therefore had instituted baptism for believers to relate baptism of water with him. And when we look through the recorded life and deeds of Elijah, we found no institution of immersion/going right underneath the water surface; only going into the Jordan for bathing, dipping.
3) The Prophet - Probably refers to Moses. And going through the record of Moses we found no immersion. Baptisimal ceremony refers to sprinkling or dashing of water and the passover blood; and the smearing, pouring over of anointing oil for a sign of cleansing. And fromthe conversation between Peter and Jesus (Jn 13v10), we know that baptism/bathing is also a sign of cleansing.
There is no record of people asking whether John was anyone to do with the essenes, showing that the baptism practised by them was not a sign recognised by the public.
The water baptism of John and Christ is once and for ever. But that of the essenes need repetition annually, even more frequent than that, indicated that even head to toe immersion is not necessarily signifying complete purity.

John 2v6 - Now there were six stone waterpots set there for the Jewish custom of purification, containing 20 or 30 gallons each.
The Jewish custom of purification mentioned here would be that instituted by Moses.
These are not winepots. They did not contain wine. These are waterpots, not mikvaot/immersion baths. They do not contain enough water for immersion. There is no mentioning of other large water container.
These waterpots contained variable amount of water, indicated their content were not stipulated by the law of purification. In the contrary an immersion pool/mikvaot has stipulated size, and therefore certified/meticulous content.
These waterpots were placed in a residential area. So Paul could have come to a water baptism (Acts 9v18) from water in similar container.
Looking at Masada in search of hints of immersion from the oldest Jewish worship place/synagogue found today, I see that the sites/areas noted to be immersion pools are near the cistern at the opposite end of the walled city from the synagogue; hardly a proof that immersion is a Jewish ritual to be celebrated in front of the people of God in the worship house/assembly.
The practice of immersing away from the Jewish settlement and synagogue reflects the practice of the essenes strongly.
However, essenes are neither following Judaism nor Christianity. Their practice departed from scriptures often.
6 containers for an entire banquet; hardly sufficient water for bathing (immersing with clean living water) a whole house of guests. The ceremony of purification has to be symbolic.

Biblical christians should not force ideas into bible texts. What is written clearly should be followed straightly. And what is not even written/mentioned there is not vital for godly living.

...

Just War and Love || Did Jesus speak only Aramaic? ||
A Failed Prophesy on Tyre? || Another Failed Prophesy on Tyre? ||
Why 4 Gospels? || Answering Errancy Allegation ||
Hebrew Matthew and document Q || Census in Luke Ch 2 ( Anachronism? ) ||
A Christian Witness || Marrying non-believer ||
Similarity warrants Recognition and Unity? || Freewill and pre-destination ||
Dynamic Equivalence and Propitiation ||

Photography || Photo Gallery || Portrait Gallery || Architecture ||
Design Consultancy || Preacher || Herbalist || Cool Sites ||

News ||
e-mail