Immersion baptism
Immersion baptism is a method of baptism that is distinguished from baptism by affusion and by aspersion, sometimes without specifying whether the immersion is total or partial, but very commonly with the indication that the person baptized is immersed in water completely. The term is also, though less commonly, applied exclusively to modes of baptism that involve only partial immersion.
Terminology
Baptism by immersion is understood by some to imply submersion of the whole body beneath the surface of the water.Others speak of baptismal immersion as either complete or partial, and do not find it tautologous to describe a particular form of immersion baptism as "full" or "total".
Still others use the term "immersion baptism" to mean a merely partial immersion by dipping the head in the water or by pouring water over the head of a person standing in a baptismal pool, and use instead for baptism that involves total immersion of the body beneath the water the term "submersion baptism".
Early Christianity
Scholars generally agree that the early church baptized by immersion. It also used other forms. Immersion was probably the norm, but at various times and places immersion, whether full or partial, and also affusion were probably in use. Baptism of the sick or dying was usually by means other than even partial immersion and was still considered valid.Some writers speak of early Christians baptizing by total immersion, or say only that total immersion was preferred. Others speak of early Christians as baptizing either by submersion or by immersion, but also by affusion. In one form of early Christian baptism, the candidate stood in water and water was poured over the upper body, and the Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church says that at least from the 2nd century baptism was administered by a method "whereby part of the candidate's body was submerged in the baptismal water which was poured over the remainder".
Archaeological evidence
, Lothar Heiser, Jean-Charles Picard, Malka Ben Pechat, and Everett Ferguson agree that early Christian baptism was normally by total immersion. Sanford La Sor considers it likely that the archaeological evidence favours total immersion. Lothar Heiser, likewise understands the literary and pictorial evidence to indicate total immersion. Jean-Charles Picard, reaches the same conclusion, and so does Malka Ben Pechat. The study by Everett Ferguson supports the view of La Sor, Heiser, Picard, and Pechat. Frank K. Flinn also says that the immersion was total, saying that the preference of the Early Church was total immersion in a stream or the sea or, if these were not available, in a fountain or bath-sized tank,Commenting on early church practice, other reference works speak of immersion without specifying whether it was total or partial. A recent Bible encyclopedia speaks of the "consensus of scholarly opinion" that the baptismal practice of John the Baptist and the apostles was by immersion. A standard Bible dictionary says that baptism was normally by immersion. Among other sources, Old says that immersion, was normally used, Grimes says "There is little doubt that early Christian baptism was adult baptism by immersion.", Howard Marshall says that immersion was the general rule, but affusion and even sprinkling were also practiced, since "archaeological evidence supports the view that in some areas Christian baptism was administered by affusion". His presentation of this view has been described by Porter and Cross as "a compelling argument". Laurie Guy says immersion was probably the norm, but that at various times and places full immersion, partial immersion and affusion were probably in use. Tischler says that total immersion seems to have been most commonly used. Stander and Louw argue that immersion was the prevailing practice of the Early Church. Grenz says that the New Testament does not state specifically what action the baptizer did to the person baptized, when both were in the water, but adds: "Nevertheless, we conclude that of the three modes immersion carries the strongest case – exegetically, historically, and theologically. Therefore, under normal circumstances it ought to be the preferred, even the sole, practice of the church." Most scholars agree that immersion was the practice of the New Testament church.
The Oxford Dictionary of the Bible says "Archaeological evidence from the early centuries shows that baptism was sometimes administered by submersion or immersion… but also by affusion from a vessel when water was poured on the candidate's head…"
The Cambridge History of Christianity also concludes from the archaeological evidence that pouring water three times over the head was a frequent arrangement.
Robin Jensen writes: "Historians have sometimes assumed that baptism was usually accomplished by full immersion – or submersion – of the body. However, the archaeological and iconographic evidence is ambiguous on this point. Many – if not most – surviving baptismal fonts are too shallow to have allowed submersion. In addition, a significant number of depictions show baptismal water being poured over the candidate's head, either from a waterfall, an orb or some kind of liturgical vessel." Eerdman's Dictionary of the Bible, also casts doubt on "the usual assumption that all NT baptisms were by immersion", stating that some early baptisteries were deep enough to stand in but not broad enough to lie down in, and mentioning that ancient representation of Christ at his baptism show him standing in waist-deep water. The immersion used by early Christians in baptizing "need not have meant full submersion in the water" and, while it may have been normal practice, it was not seen as a necessary mode of baptism, so that other modes also may have been used. Submersion, as opposed to partial immersion, may even have been a minority practice in early Christianity.
Earliest description of Christian baptism outside the New Testament
The Didache or Teaching of the Twelve Apostles, an anonymous book of 16 short chapters, is probably the earliest known written instructions, outside of the Bible, for administering baptism. The first version of it was written. The second, with insertions and additions, was written. This work, rediscovered in the 19th century, provides a unique look at Christianity in the Apostolic Age. Its instructions on baptism are as follows:Commentaries, including those that distinguish immersion from submersion, typically understand that the Didache indicates a preference for baptizing by immersion, in "living water". Barclay observes that the Didache shows that baptism in the early church was by total immersion, if possible, Barton describes the immersion of the Didache as "ideally by total immersion", and Welch says it was by "complete immersion". In cases of insufficient water it permits pouring, which it differentiates from immersion, using the Greek word ekcheō, and not baptizō, but which it still considers to be a form of baptism.
Martin and Davids say the Didache envisages "some form of immersion", and the Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church refers its readers to its entry on immersion, which it distinguishes from submersion and affusion.
The Didache gives "the first explicit reference to baptism by pouring, although the New Testament does not exclude the possibility of this practice" Brownson says that the Didache does not state whether pouring or immersion was recommended when using running water, and Sinclair B. Ferguson argues that the only mode that the Didache mentions is affusion. Lane says that "it is probable that immersion was in fact the normal practice of baptism in the early church, but it was not regarded as an important issue", and states that the Didache does not suggest that the pouring of water was any less valid than immersion.
The Jewish-Christian sect known as the Ebionites were known to immerse themselves in a ritual bath while they were fully clothed.
New Testament studies
Christian theologians such as John Piper use several parts of the New Testament to support full immersion as the intended symbol:Piper asserts that baptism refers to the physical lowering into the water and rising in faith in part because of the reflection of this symbol in which says "having been buried with him in baptism and raised with him through your faith in the power of God, who raised him from the dead through the glory of the Father, so we too might walk in newness of life." Others hold that there is no evidence in the New Testament that any one mode of baptism was used.
Criticism of the total immersion (submersion) view
Grammatical criticism
As criticism of the claim that, in, which is the only reference in the New Testament to Christian baptism being administered in the open, the actions of "going down into the water" and "coming up out of the water" indicate that this baptism was by immersion, it is pointed out that "going down into" and "coming up out of" a river or a store of still water, actions there ascribed to both the baptizer and the baptized, do not necessarily involve immersion in the water. In the nineteenth century, anti-immersionist Rev. W. A. McKay wrote a polemic work against immersion baptism, arguing that it was a theological invention of the Roman Catholic Church. Differentiating between immersion and affusion, McKay held that βαπτίζω referred to affusion, as opposed to immersion. Challenging immersion baptism, he wrote:In the same passage the act of baptizing is distinguished from the going down into the water: "They both went down into the water, Philip and the eunuch, and he baptized him. And when they came up out of the water…"
As McKay and others also pointed out, the Greek preposition εἰς, here translated as "into", is the same as is used when Peter is told to go to the sea and take the first fish that came up and in other passages where it obviously did not imply entry of the kind that submersion involves. In fact, in the same chapter 8 of the Acts of the Apostles, the preposition εἰς appears 11 times, but only once is it commonly translated as "into"; in the other verses in which it appears it is best translated as "to". The same ambiguity pertains to the preposition ἐκ.