1. The New Testament practice, Mark 16:15-16, Hebrews 6:3, Mt. 28:19; John 3:22, 4:1-2; Acts 2:38; 2:41; 8:12, 16, 36, 38; 9:18; 10:47-48; 16:15, 33; 18:8; 19:3, 5; 1 Cor. 1:14-16; Eph. 4:5, 1 Peter 3:21, was to take a new believer in Jesus Christ and publicly immerse them into the water in the name of the Father, Son, and the Holy Spirit.

2. Many Protestants believe in infant baptism or pouring as a mode of baptism. Jesus Christ and the Apostles did not practice alternate modes of baptism.

Word Study on Baptism in the New Testament

A. Historical definition of the word baptizo: Enhanced Strong’s Concordance defines the word as: 1 to dip repeatedly, to immerse, to submerge (of vessels sunk). 2 to cleanse by dipping or submerging, to wash, to make clean with water, to wash one’s self, bathe. 3 to overwhelm. ¹

The clearest example that shows the meaning of baptizo is a text from the Greek poet and physician Nicander, who lived about 200 B.C. It is a recipe for making pickles and is helpful because it uses both words. Nicander says that in order to make a pickle, the vegetable should first be ‘dipped’ (bapto) into boiling water and then ‘baptised’ (baptizo) in the vinegar solution. Both verbs concern the immersing of vegetables in a solution. But the first is temporary. The second, the act of baptizing the vegetable, produces a permanent change. When used in the New Testament, this word more often refers to our union and identification with Christ than to our water baptism. e.g. Mark 16:16. ‘He that believes and is baptised shall be saved’. Christ is saying that mere intellectual assent is not enough. There must be a union with him, a real change, like the vegetable to the pickle! (Bible Study Magazine, James Montgomery Boice, May 1989.) ²

Wilmington’s Guide to the Bible described this question as follows: “What do Greek authorities say about the meaning of the word? Let us consider three of the more well-known lexicons. The classical Greek lexicon was written by Liddell and Scott, Church of England men. The New Testament Greek lexicon was compiled by Thayer, a scholar of the Congregational Church. The lexicon of theological terms was written by a German Lutheran named Cremer. All these men agree that the word in its origin means to dip, immerse, submerge or overwhelm.

Dr. Thomas J. Conant in his Meaning and Use of Baptizein sums up a study of the use of the word throughout the history of Greek literature with these words, ‘In all the word has retained its ground meaning without change. From the earliest age of Greek literature down to its close, a period of about 2,000 years, not an example has been found in which the word has any other meaning.’

The words sprinkling or pouring are never used in the New Testament for the rite of baptism. This has compelled scholars of all denominational groups to admit that in the original meaning and in the New Testament use baptism meant immersion. Martyn Luther said: “The term baptism is a Greek word. It may be rendered a dipping, when we dip something in water, that it may be entirely covered with water.” John Calvin said: “The word baptize signifies to immerse; and the rite of immersion was observed by the ancient church.” Brenner, a Roman Catholic said: “For 1300 years was baptism generally and regularly an immersion of the person under water, and only in extraordinary cases, a sprinkling or pouring with water. The latter was moreover disputed as a mode of baptism, nay even forbidden.” Other men could have been cited, but this is sufficient to show us the universal acceptance of the meaning of the word baptism.

The following paragraph was written by those who have a different view of baptism instead of believers baptism by immersion. This explanation can give you incite into the justification other evangelicals use to baptize people using different modes and methods. The following conclusions seem to contradict the plain teaching of Scripture, the findings of other scholars, and the practice of the early church.

“The opening comments about the word Baptizo and bapto are totally erroneous. Bapto and Baptizo are different words and Bapto is never used for baptism. The mode of baptism can in no way be determined from the Greek word rendered “baptize.” Baptists say that it means “to dip,” and nothing else. That is an incorrect view of the meaning of the word. It means both (1) to dip a thing into an element or liquid, and (2) to put an element or liquid over or on it. Nothing therefore as to the mode of baptism can be concluded from the mere word used. The word has a wide latitude of meaning, not only in the New Testament, but also in the LXX. Version of the Old Testament, where it is used of the ablutions and baptisms required by the Mosaic law. These were effected by immersion, and by affusion and sprinkling; and the same word, “washings” (Heb. 9:10, 13, 19, 21) or “baptisms,” designates them all. In the New Testament there cannot be found a single well-authenticated instance of the occurrence of the word where it necessarily means immersion. Moreover, none of the instances of baptism recorded in the Acts of the Apostles (2:38–41; 8:26–39; 9:17, 18; 22:12–16; 10:44–48; 16:32–34) favors the idea that it was by dipping the person baptized, or by immersion, while in some of them such a mode was highly improbable.”

These words are the strained attempts to justify a practice, infant baptism, that does not exist in the New Testament. God intended for every Christian to be baptized by immersion after they placed their faith in Christ.

1. Identifies you with a person - “In the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit” “in the name of the Lord Jesus.” John’s baptism identified a person with John the Baptist. Believer’s baptism permanently identifies someone with Jesus Christ. Christ did not allow us to determine the ceremony we would use to communicate a new life in Christ. Could you image what people would have decided to do? Maybe some would have crucified a chicken, or shaved the head, or pierced the lip. Jesus taught us to be publicly baptized by immersion in order to identify with Him.

2. Made a private commitment public - Jesus said for the person who has been won to faith should be baptized in order to publicize this commitment (Mt 28:19). Paul practiced baptism everywhere he went to publicize the private commitment to Jesus. Even in the case of the Ethiopian Eunuch, Phillip baptized him in order to publicize his faith to the large group with whom he traveled (Acts 8:38). The group is not specifically identified but the Ethiopian Eunuch is identified as the treasurer of Ethiopia. The testimony of history reveals that he would have traveled in a large group.

3. Initiated a believer into the local church (body of Christ). In 1 Corinthians 12:13, Paul used baptism to illustrate the way we were initiated into the body of Christ. Jesus, in Mt. 28:19Acts 2 demonstrates the same truth. They were saved and baptized and then they were taught and discipled.

4. Makes the practice of your faith publicly moral and acceptable - 1 Peter 3:21 “a good conscience before God” 1. Authenticates the commitment - Mark 16:15-16 2. Allows for participation in the local church - Acts 2:41-47; Acts 9:18; Acts 8:12; Acts 16:15, 33; Acts 18:8; 1 Cor. 1:14, 16; Acts 19:3-5 3. Qualifies one to be a receptor of the teachings of Jesus through His apostles, pastors and teachers - Matthew 28:18-20

***Believer’s baptism serves as a rite of passage just as a wedding serves as a rite of passage. A wedding accomplishes all four things that a baptism does: makes a private commitment public, identifies you with a person, initiates and inaugurates into a new family, and makes the practice of the commitment moral. We have weddings so that the community and the church can be notified in a moral way that a new relationship has begun between two people. Jesus taught us to baptize so that the community and the church can know that a new relationship has begun.

The Five Points of Calvinism

T - total depravity
U - unconditional election
L - limited atonement
I - irresistible grace
P - perseverance of the saints

Total Depravity means that the natural man is never able to do any good that is fundamentally pleasing to God, and, in fact, does evil all the time.¹

We mean by this doctrine, therefore, that man is thoroughly crooked, wicked, and sinful by nature in himself, and by position before God. This corrupt nature he received in Adam’s fall into sin, and from Adam, and is evidenced in every man’s choice and practice of sin, in which he is like Adam.²

When Calvinists speak of man as being totally depraved, they mean that man’s nature is corrupt, perverse, and sinful throughout.³

View #1 - Determinism - This view holds that a man’s acts caused by another - In determinism, God causes everything; some Duelist believe either God or Satan causes everything. Many modern day Calvinists have an extreme view of sovereignty and make God the only agent and not the sovereign agent. Therefore, God causes everything. Calvinists admit that evil originated in one of two possible ways: first, it is a mystery or second, God created it. This comes from their extreme view of God’s sovereignty. Yet, the Bible presents God as the sovereign agent but not the only cause. God is not the only agent. He does rule over all but He has granted agency to others.

View #2 - Indeterminism - acts with no cause whatsoever - This view holds that things happen without cause. People do not cause anything to happen but rather things just happen.

View #3 - Selfdeterminism - self-caused actions - This view holds that man does what he does because he causes his own actions. This view does not ignore the influence of the flesh, the Spirit of God, the world, Satan, and other factors but rather claims that man chooses for himself what to do. There are a couple of forms of selfdeterminism but all of the forms have a common thread. The common thread is that a person could have done differently. An outside force did not cause the action.

John 7:17: “If anyone wills to do His will, he shall know concerning the doctrine, whether it is from God or whether I speak on My own authority.” Jesus claimed that we could choose (will) to do His will.

Romans 2:10: “but glory, honor, and peace to everyone who works what is good, to the Jew first and also to the Greek.” Here a lost person can do good.

1 Peter 2:18: “Servants, be submissive to your masters with all fear, not only to the good and gentle, but also to the harsh.” Here, Christian are called to submit to good unsaved masters.

Matthew 7:11: “If you then, being evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father who is in heaven give good things to those who ask Him!” Here an evil person gives good gifts. Giving like the Father gives though we are evil demonstrates the ability man has though depraved.

Acts 10:2, speaking of unsaved Cornelius: “a devout man and one who feared God with all his household, who gave alms generously to the people, and prayed to God always.” And in verse 22: “ And they said, “Cornelius the centurion, a just man, one who fears God and has a good reputation among all the nation of the Jews, was divinely instructed by a holy angel to summon you to his house, and to hear words from you.” Cornelius was an unsaved person yet he was good, devout, giving, and feared God.

1. Objection: Violates the sovereignty of God - Answer: God knows how everyone will use their freedom and in that sense the act is determined but “from the standpoint of our freedom it is not determined.”¹⁰ Geisler further explains that selfdeterminism does not deny that God uses persuasive means to get us to do His will but it does deny that God uses coercive means.

2. Objection: Contrary to the grace of God - If we choose Christ then is not our choice of Him contrary to grace. Answer: Geisler commented: “There are no conditions for God’s giving of salvation; it is wholly of grace. But there is one (and only one) condition for receiving the gift–true saving faith.”¹¹ “Man does not initiate salvation (Rom. 3:11), and he cannot attain it (Rom. 4:5). But he can and must receive it (John 1:12). Salvation is an unconditional act of God’s election. Man’s faith is not a condition for God giving salvation, but it is for man receiving it. Nevertheless, the act of faith (free choice) by which man receives salvation is not meritorious. It is the Giver who gets credit for the gift, not the receiver.”¹²

A. Ephesians 2:8-9. They claim that the grace and the faith are gifts from God. Geisler responded to this passage:¹³ “But even John Calvin said of this text that “he does not mean that faith is the gift of God, but that salvation is given to us by God, or, that we obtain it by the gift of God.”¹⁴ In addition, however plausible this interpretation may seem in English, it is very clear from the Greek that Ephesians 2:8-9 is not referring to faith as a gift from God. For the “that” (touto) is neuter in form and cannot refer to “faith” (pistis), which is feminine. The antecedent of “it is the gift of God” is the salvation by grace through faith (v. 9). Commenting on this passage, the great New Testament Greek scholar A. T. Robertson noted: “‘Grace’ is God’s part, ‘faith’ ours. And that [it] (kai touto) is neuter, not feminine taute, and so refers not to pistis [faith] or to charis [grace] (feminine also), but to the act of being saved by grace conditioned on faith on our part.”¹⁵

While some have argued that a pronoun may agree in sense, but not in form, with its antecedent, this view is refuted by Gregory Sapaugh, who notes that “if Paul wanted to refer to pistis (‘faith’), he could have written the feminine taute, instead of the neuter, touto, and his meaning would have been clear.” But he did not. Rather, by the “that” (touto) Paul refers to the whole process of “salvation by grace through faith.” Sapaugh notes that “this position is further supported by the parallelism between ouk hymon (‘and this not of yourselves’) in 2:8 and ouk ex ergon (‘not of works’) in 2:9. The latter phrase would not be meaningful if it referred to pisteos (‘faith’). Instead, it clearly means salvation is ‘not of works.’”¹⁶

B. Phil. 1:29 - Both suffering and believing are presented as something we ought to do and God has granted us the opportunity to do both. It was not something that God did for them but He graced them with the privilege of doing both of them.

C. John 6:44-45 - The method of obtaining faith is not mentioned here but we know from Romans 10 that faith comes by hearing the word of God. The verse does not say that faith is the gift of God. God draws through revelation.

D. Romans 10:17 - The Word of God grants the person an object of faith but not faith itself. The Word of God also grants the person the ability to hear the Word.

E. Romans 12:3 - God has dealt to every believer a measure of faith just as He does to some believers in a more abundant way (1 Cor. 12). Just as God has called every believer to teach (Mt. 28:19-20) yet grants some the gift of teaching. God gives some believers an extra measure of faith yet all have been called to have faith and enabled by the Word of God to have faith.

A. Luke 13:3
B. John 3:16
C. John 3:18
D. John 6:29
E. John 11:40
F. John 12:36
G. Acts 16:31
H. Acts 17:30
I. Acts 20:21
J. Hebrews 11:6
K. Romans 3:22; 4:11, 24; 10:9, 14; 1 Cor. 1:21; Gal. 3:22; Eph. 1:16; 1 Thess. 1:7, 4:14; 1 Tim. 1:16
L. The Bible describes faith as our own: Luke 7:50 “your faith;” Rom. 4:5 “his faith;” “their faith” Matt. 9:2; but never “God’s faith.”