International Bible Teaching Ministries
Types of Baptism
Question 1: If one is baptized by immersion into a denomination, does one need to be baptized again?
ANSWER: The Church of Christ is the one and only body of Christ (Ephesians 1:22-23; Colossians 1:18 & 24). It is the church that Christ promised to build (Matthew 16:18); the church for which He died (Acts 20:28); and the church to which people were added on the day of Pentecost (Acts 2:47). All denominations have their origin in the doctrines and commandments of men (Matthew 15:9) and are, therefore, impostors that will one day be rooted up (Matthew 15:13). To be immersed, poured, or sprinkled into a denomination avails absolutely nothing, since such lacks biblical authority. When one enters a denomination, he or she does not change their relationship with the world. They remain in the world, since denominationalism is of the world and not of God. Notice carefully in Acts 19:1-5 that certain Ephesians had been immersed in water for the wrong reason, that is, unto John's baptism! After Paul preached to them, they were then baptized properly, that is, by the authority of (in the name of) the Lord Jesus. Scriptural baptism is an immersion in water (Romans 6:1-5) for the remission of sins (Acts 2:38) into the one body (I Corinthians 12:13), the Church of Christ (Romans 16:16). This action and its purpose must be understood by the person being baptized. Otherwise, it is of no effect at all! Any person, whether in a denomination or not, must be scripturally baptized to be added by God to the church of the Bible, the Church of Christ.
Question 2: Does the New Testament authorize the practice of sprinkling and pouring as baptism?
ANSWER: Sprinkling and pouring in the place of immersion (a burial) was not generally practiced until early in the thirteenth century. The word "baptism" in the New Testament comes from the Greek word "baptizo." This word means to dip, immerse, submerge, plunge, sink, or overwhelm. In Mark 16:16 our Lord literally specified and authorized only the following: "He that believeth and is immersed (baptismos) shall be saved." The command to be buried in water relates to a single specific action, which excludes all other actions. Pouring (from the Greek word “cheo”) and sprinkling (from the Greek word “rhantizo”) are totally unrelated actions. Had our Lord authorized either of these, He would have used the words describing these actions. He did not! Those who teach and practice sprinkling and pouring in the place of a burial are guilty of presumptuous sin (Psalms 19:13; II Peter 2:10) and are, therefore, without God (Isaiah 59:1-2). The people upon whom they sprinkle or pour water are still in their sins, because they have not obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine which frees from sin (Romans 6:16-18).
Every account of water baptism in the New Testament was an immersion (burial) in water for the remission of sins, and into the one body of our Lord; that is, the church of Christ! There is no other baptism that will save!
Question 3: Is the baptism of Acts 2:38 water baptism or Holy Spirit baptism?
ANSWER: It is an immersion in water! The baptism of the Holy Spirit (Matthew 3:11; John 14:15-26; John 15:26; John 16:7-14; Luke 24:49; Acts 2:1-4) was a promise made to the apostles (not a commandment) and fulfilled in Acts 2:1-4. A promise is not something to which a person can render obedience as demanded in the great commission of Matthew 28:18-20. Understanding this principle can help us to see which baptism is under discussion by an inspired writer as we study. Passages dealing with commandments to be baptized can always be taken to mean water baptism. For example, in Acts 2:36, the people to whom Peter was preaching asked, "what shall we do?" Peter commanded them. "Repent and be baptized" (Vs.38). We can know then, without doubt, that this does not refer to Holy Spirit baptism, because it is something people were commanded to do in order to gain the remission of sins (salvation). If the baptism here had signified Holy Spirit baptism, there would have been nothing for anyone to do! They would simply have received the promise!
Question 4: What is the baptism of Matthew 28:18-20?
ANSWER: It can only be "water baptism!" Obviously, the baptism in this passage is one of commandment. This means that everyone is commanded to be baptized. Holy Spirit baptism was never commanded, but, rather, it was a promise to be fulfilled (Acts 1:4-5). Since at the time of the writing of Ephesians 4:4 by the apostle Paul, there was clearly only "one baptism" and since the baptism of Matthew 28:18-20 was to be effective until the "end of the world," it can only be concluded that the promise of Holy Spirit baptism was fulfilled prior to the writing of the book of Ephesians in 63/65AD. Also in 65AD, Peter wrote about water baptism being the baptism that "doth also now save us" (I Peter 3:20-21). So then, Paul said in 63/65AD, there is only "one baptism!" Peter says at the same time that this one baptism is "water baptism." We know clearly that the baptism of Matthew 28:18-20 is the only baptism that would continue until the "end of the world." Therefore, the baptism spoken of in this passage can only be "water baptism."
Question 5: Which baptism in the New Testament is right, Matthew 28:19 or Acts 2:38?
ANSWER: Both are right, because they are one and the same. There is no difference! Jesus in Matthew twenty-eight was speaking to the eleven disciples and gave them the Great Commission, "All power (authority) is given unto me in heaven and in earth. Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen." This passage is a commandment Jesus gave directly to His disciples and was first carried out by them in Acts, the second chapter. The question that needs to be considered at this point is, “Were Peter and the others obedient or disobedient in Acts two to the Lord's command of Matthew 28?” If they baptized in a way different from that commanded, then they were disobedient! If they were baptized in the same way that Christ commanded, then it follows that they were obedient! Since three thousand souls were saved that day, and added by the Lord to His church, it is evident, and without doubt, that He was satisfied that Peter and the others had been obedient to Him. Since it is clear that they were obedient and pleasing to the Lord, it can only be concluded that there is no difference in the baptism of Matthew 28:19 and that of Acts 2:38!
Question 6: It is true that Judas Iscariot baptized people, but this was before he betrayed Jesus, and it was while the Law of Moses was in force. Is this not the same as Jesus forgiving the thief on the cross? In other words, we can't use this example today, because we are under the Law of Christ.
ANSWER: I understand the question to be: "Is the reason we do not use the baptism performed by Judas (John 4:2) as an example today because he lived under the Law of Moses?" The answer would be "No!" This would be the case, because the baptism performed by the disciples before the Day of Pentecost was not a part of the Mosaical Law! It had it's beginning with John, the son of Zacharias (Luke 3:2-3), in about 29AD.
If this question is related to the two preceding questions, i.e., if it is being suggested that non-Christians or sinful people today would have been scripturally approved to baptize others today, had it been the case that Judas performed his baptizing after he sinned by betraying Christ, the answer would still be "No!"
The reason for not using the baptism performed by the disciples before the Day of Pentecost as an example today is because this baptism was effective only until the Day of Pentecost. It was called "John's baptism" (Acts 19:3). On Pentecost Day, the baptism of Christ became effective (Acts 2:38) and it alone will remain in effect until the end of the world (Matthew 28:18-20). In Acts 18:24 through Acts 19:5, we read of Ephesians who had been improperly baptized with "John's baptism" after the Day of Pentecost. These were instructed by the apostle Paul to be baptized with "Christ's baptism," clear evidence that John's baptism had become ineffective! This is the reason why we cannot use the baptizing performed by Judas as an example today! The only approved examples of baptism for people today are to be found in the book of Acts, from Pentecost day forward!
We cannot use the baptism of John (as performed by Judas) for our example because it is not a part of the Law of Christ binding upon all men today!
Question 7: Does Ephesians 4:5 teach that there is only one baptism or does it mean that the baptism we get is one in Jesus alone? What about the baptism of Holy Spirit and fire?
ANSWER: First we need to consider in Ephesians 4:4-6 what the word "one" means! Clearly, in the account of Matthew's gospel, we read of water baptism (Matthew 28:29); of Holy Spirit baptism (Matthew 3:11); and, in the same passage, the baptism of fire. It cannot be successfully denied that these are "three" different and distinct baptisms. Neither can it be successfully argued that the word "one" in Ephesians 4:4-6 means "three." Whatever it means when it speaks of 'one body, one Spirit, one hope, one Lord, one faith, and one God,' it must also mean when it speaks of ‘one baptism!’ In other words, if this passage teaches that there is "one" Lord, then it must also teach that there is "one" baptism. If there is "one" there cannot be "three." It is impossible! If the Holy Spirit wanted us to understand that there were "three" different baptisms at the time of this writing, He would have used the word "three," not the word "one!"
The Holy Spirit had been promised (Acts 1:5) and His coming was fulfilled (satisfied) in Acts 2,10 & 11. Since the purposes for which the Holy Spirit came were totally satisfied, this baptism, and the need for it, no longer exists! The baptism of fire is not for today, because it is yet future! Matthew 3:12 clearly shows that this baptism has reference to the unquenchable fires of hell!
There is, therefore, only "one" baptism today! It is the baptism of water, which "doth also now save us" (I Peter 3:21).
Question 8: Does Acts 19:5 refer to baptism in the Holy Spirit?
ANSWER: No! This is clearly indicated because of what happened in Verse six. Had the Ephesians been baptized in the Holy Spirit in Verse five, there would have been no reason for Paul to have laid hands on them in Verse six to impart the spiritual gifts of speaking in other languages and prophesying. The gifts would have come with the baptism of the Holy Spirit had it actually occurred (Acts 2:1-4 & Acts 10:44-48). The baptism of this passage must, then, refer to water baptism by the authority of the Lord Jesus. These had previously been baptized in water "unto John's baptism" after his baptism had become ineffective at Pentecost, at which time the Lord's baptism in water became effective for all men everywhere, "even as many as the Lord our God shall call" (Acts 2:37-47).
Question 9: What kind of baptism did Paul and Silas use to baptize the Jailer and all his family (Acts 16:30-33)?
ANSWER: The Roman Jailer was immersed in water for the remission of sins, just as were those on the Day of Pentecost in Acts Two. Peter had told those to repent and be baptized for the remission of sins. This is exactly what (after hearing the Word of the Lord) the Roman Jailer did. He washed their stripes (an indication of his repentance) and was baptized. The result was the same for him as it was for those on Pentecost. In Verse thirty, the Jailer had asked, "What must I do to be saved?" Paul's response was: "Believe on (surrender completely to) the Lord Jesus Christ." The Roman Jailer did not have "faith in Christ" at that point, neither was he saved at that point! We can know this because the same apostle says that "faith" comes by hearing (accepting and obeying) the Word of God (Romans 10:17). Therefore, the Jailer could not have had "saving faith" until after he had heard the Word of the Lord. In other words, he could not have had "saving faith" without obedience to that which he had been taught (James 2:14-24). It is not enough simply to believe in Christ (to give mental assent to His Deity), because even the devils do that (James 2:19.) Additionally, Peter tells us that "God is no respecter of persons." This means that however one is saved, all must be saved! How were the people on Pentecost saved? The Roman Jailer was saved in exactly the same way! It is significant, too, that it is said of the Roman Jailer (just as the Ethiopian eunuch of Acts 8:26-40) that he rejoiced in his salvation after his baptism (not before). The American Standard Version says in Verse thirty-four that he "rejoiced greatly, with all his house, HAVING BELIEVED in God." Clearly then the Jailer is said to have "believed" in God (in response to Paul's directive of Verse thirty-one) after he had been baptized (not before)! The point is that belief in this passage is shown to involve “obedient faith.”
Question 10: When I was baptized, I was buried in water three times. Is this the correct way to be baptized? How many times does one have to be dipped, in order to be properly baptized?
ANSWER: Just once, provided that the baptism is understood and for the right reasons. The idea of three (Triune) baptisms comes from a misunderstanding of what is being said by Christ in Matthew 28:18-20 when he refers to the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. Christ is not saying, ‘dip once for each personality mentioned.’ He is simply saying that scriptural baptism places one into a relationship with the Three; Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. The Bible in no place indicates the necessity of more than one dipping, but clearly to the contrary. For example, we learn from Romans 6:3-5 that we are buried as Christ was buried. Our baptism is a pattern or form of His death, burial, and resurrection (I Corinthians 15:4; Romans 6:17-18). He died once, was buried once, and arose once! Following the pattern, we do the same!
Your latter question reads: “How many times does one have to be dipped in order to be properly baptized.” Since baptism is a burial, we could ask the question this way, “How many time does one have to be dipped to be buried?” Is a person buried the first time dipped? I think so! Or would one suggest that the first dip puts a person in a relationship with only the Father? Then I would ask, how is it possible to be in the Father without being in the Son, since they are one in each other (John 17:21). It isn’t!
One more question: How many times do we put a dead person under the earth before we say, “He’s buried!” Just once! How many times was Christ buried? Just once! How many times should we be buried? Just once!
Scriptural baptism is a single immersion in water (Romans 6:1-5) for the remission of sins (Acts 2:38) into the one body (I Corinthians 12:13), the Church of Christ (Romans 16:16). The action of a burial, and its purpose, must be understood by the person being baptized. Otherwise, it is of no effect at all! Any person, whether having been dipped into a denomination or not, must be properly and scripturally baptized to be added by God to the church of the Bible, the Church of Christ. Triune (triple) baptizing is not authorized by the Word of God and, therefore, avails nothing!
Question 11: On Baptism: I understand that New Testament baptism is a burial in water. However, I would like to know whether the following passages indicate that sprinkling is also a form to be used; Hebrews 9:13-15; 10:19-23; John 13:15-17; Isaiah 52:15: Ezekiel 36:24-27.
ANSWER: All but two of these passage have to do with “sprinklings” under the Old Testament, many years before the baptism of the New Testament was authorized and commanded. Clearly these could have nothing to do with the mode of baptism under the New Testament. The other two passages in using the word “sprinkling” or “washing” likewise do not refer remotely to water baptism. John 13:15-17 involves the washing of the disciple’s feet by Jesus in order that He might teach them a lesson in humility. It has nothing at all to do with baptism. Neither is the word “sprinkling” in Hebrews 10:22 a reference to water baptism. The word “hearts” in Verse 22 refers to the “mind” of man. “Having our hearts (minds) sprinkled from an evil conscience relates to a changing of the mind or the act of repentance. The word “sprinkling” stands over against the “sprinkling” of the Old Testament. Our consciences are changed when we understand what the blood of Christ provides. In this sense our hearts are “sprinkled.” That reference is not to baptism is evidenced by the fact that the latter part of the verse does discuss baptism, i.e., “and our bodies (sins of the body) washed in pure water.” The writer is discussing repentance and baptism! He is not suggesting that both of the two different actions (sprinkling of the heart and washing of the body) refer to baptism. Clearly only the latter does, i.e., the washing of the body, which is the washing of regeneration of Titus 3:5 and the new birth of John 3:3-5!