Some argue that baptism is not essential for salvation. Jesus disagrees, for He said, “He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved” (Mark 16:16). However, this article is not about the defense of the necessity of baptism.
Rather, it is also needful to consider the nature of baptism. For, many in the religious world who believe and teach that baptism is necessary for salvation have changed the nature to that of sprinkling or pouring as an alternative to immersion. In this first portion of our study, let us consider some grammatical and historical details.
The English word “baptism” finds its roots in the Greek word bapto or baptizo. In his article “What Is the History of Infant Sprinkling?”, Wayne Jackson correctly affirms, “The Greek verb baptizo means to immerse”
Etymology of the word shows that it made its way from the Greek language, into Latin, into French, and then into English (www.etymonline.com). Therefore, it was not a word that the early English Bible translators manufactured, which is a view this writer has believed for some time. Rather, they chose to use an established English word for seemingly biased reasons. In his article, “Baptism - Transliteration, Translation and Meaning,” Matt Dabbs wrote, “In the case of baptism the best explanation I can find is that translating it ‘to immerse’ had political and religious ramifications in the days of the early English translations” (www.mattdabbs.com). It is certainly comprehensible that, if when the authorized English translations were made, those in power believed “baptism” was something other than immersion, they would not want the word “immersion” used where the Greek word is found in the Bible. In another online article, “The History of How Sprinkling Replaced Immersion as a Baptismal Form,” Carl Mitchell wrote: “baptism was eventually changed from its original form and came to involve having a little water sprinkled or poured on ones head. Two reasons brought about this change. The first was the practice of waiting until late in life to accept baptism so that one could die very soon thereafter before having amassed a big load of sins. By waiting so late, some risked dying before getting to a pool of water sufficient for a total immersion.
As a compromise, the practice of sprinkling began to occur. This was in fact referred to as “clinical” baptism, and was considered suspect by many, especially in North Africa. As an example, Emperor Constantine, in 337 was baptized on his deathbed by Eusebius of Nicomedia.
A second reason was the beginning of baptizing infants, something neither commanded nor illustrated in the New Testament. There probably began to be occasional baptisms of infants in the late 2nd century, but it did not gain wide acceptance until the time of Augustine (AD 354-430). Augustine took the position that infants inherit the sin of Adam and Eve, and therefore are born sinners and should be baptized soon after their birth (www.searchforbiblicaltruth.com).
Lord willing, next week, we will consider Old Testament evidence for Biblical baptism being immersion and not sprinkling or pouring.
Clifton Angel preaches for Coldwater church of Christ in Coldwater.
