HOME/FAQ
 MY STORY
 BOOKS
 WEB RESOURCES
 MISCELLANY
 LUTHER  ON:
 FAITH & WORKS
 [FUTURE TOPIC]
 [FUTURE TOPIC]
 [FUTURE TOPIC]
 [FUTURE TOPIC]
~ Baptism Questions & Answers ~

Q. The Greek word baptizo translated as "baptize" in the scriptures means "to immerse." Why do Lutherans violate scripture by using sprinkling or pouring to baptize?
A. We are not saved by obeying a rule, following a method, or correctly performing a ceremony. We are saved by getting cleansed from our sin in the eyes of God. Just because the word used in the scriptures for that cleansing and for that rite of bringing a person into Christ's body is "immersion," doesn't mean we are necessarily bound to the method of literally immersing the person. I say this for two reasons:
  1. The rite is the way we are washed from sin (Acts 22:16) in Christ's blood. It is not meant to refer to a literal washing of the body (1 Peter 3:21). Washing from sin is also symbolized in other ways in the scriptures. Consider the following verses:
    Exodus 24:6-8:And Moses took half of the blood, and put it in basons; and half of the blood he sprinkled on the altar.

    And he took the book of the covenant, and read in the audience of the people: and they said, All that the LORD hath said will we do, and be obedient.

    And Moses took the blood, and sprinkled it on the people, and said, Behold the blood of the covenant, which the LORD hath made with you concerning all these words.

    Compare this with Hebrews 10:22:
    Let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience, and our bodies washed with pure water.
    Note also in this regard these interesting OT prophecies:
    Then will I sprinkle clean water upon you, and ye shall be clean: from all your filthiness, and from all your idols, will I cleanse you.

    A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you: and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you an heart of flesh.

    And I will put my spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes, and ye shall keep my judgments, and do them.
    (Ezekiel 36:25-27 KJV)

    Behold, my servant shall deal prudently, he shall be exalted and extolled, and be very high.

    As many were astonied at thee; his visage was so marred more than any man, and his form more than the sons of men:

    So shall he sprinkle many nations; the kings shall shut their mouths at him: for that which had not been told them shall they see; and that which they had not heard shall they consider.
    (Isaiah 52:13-15 KJV)

    So sprinkling has just as much Biblical symbolism behind it as does immersion (which of course, in addition to showing washing, shows identification with Christ's burial in death - Romans 6:3-4). As for pouring, note Titus 3:5-6:

    But after that the kindness and love of God our Saviour toward man appeared,

    Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost;

    Which he shed (literally, "poured out") on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Saviour.

    The reason the word "baptism" (immersion) was used of this rite was not because the method must always be literal immersion. It was because of its symbolism of being buried with Christ in his death (Romans 6:3-4), as well as to its symbolism as a washing. However, this cleansing from sin in Christ is also referred to in several other symbolic ways in the New Testament; that is why the rite has come down to us in the church in several forms. In Christian Dogmatics, John Mueller comments, "...our Lutheran catechism rightly holds that 'to baptize' means 'to apply water by washing, pouring, sprinkling, or immersing.'"


  2. We have an explicit source that shows what the word "baptizo" meant to Greek speakers, dating to the generation after the apostles, showing that to them it did not mean to literally immerse. The Didache, dated perhaps as early as A.D. 65 but no later than A.D. 120, says this:
    Now about baptism, baptize this way: after first uttering all of these things, baptize "into the name of the Father and of the son and of the holy Spirit" in running water. But if you do not have running water, baptize in other water. Now if you are not able to do so in cold water, do it in warm water. Now if you don't have either, pour water three times on the head, "into the name of the Father, and of the son, and of the holy Spirit." Now before the ritual cleansing, the baptizer and the one being baptized should fast, and any others who are able. Now you will give word for the one who is being baptized to fast for one or two days beforehand.
    My point is not that everything the Didache says lines up with the scriptures. Rather, I am pointing out that this is a work written in the same language and circulated in the same culture as the apostles among people who had sat under their teaching, or whose parents had. In fact, the document purports to be written by the apostles - it was also called "The Teaching of the Twelve" (the Greek word didache is related to "doctrine," "didactic," etc.). Whoever wrote it wanted Greek-speaking Christians to think that it was written by the apostles.

    If the Greek word baptizo meant only "to immerse," and if Greek-speaking Christians who had sat under the teaching of the apostles knew that any other use was a blatant violation of not only what baptism was supposed to be, but also of the Greek language itself, then the above passage would have immediately labeled the authors as frauds - completely ignorant of the meaning of their own language. That fact that the authors could write of baptism in this way show that in Greek the word baptizo was not restricted to cases of literal immersion. This is strictly a linguistic point, not an endorsement of the theological or doctrinal content of the Didache.

    3. (Back to questions.)

 Q. How can Lutherans believe both in salvation by faith and in infant baptism? How can infants have faith?
A. The same way that adults do - the Holy Spirit creates it in them when they hear the Gospel:
And it came to pass, that, when Elisabeth heard the salutation of Mary, the babe leaped in her womb; and Elisabeth was filled with the Holy Ghost: And she spake out with a loud voice, and said, Blessed art thou among women, and blessed is the fruit of thy womb. And whence is this to me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me? For, lo, as soon as the voice of thy salutation sounded in mine ears, the babe leaped in my womb for joy.
(Luke 1:41-44 KJV)
If the Holy Spirit can move a baby in the womb to respond with joy to the proclamation of the coming Savior, then it is not in the least bit difficult for me to believe that He can move an infant to respond with trust in that Savior to the promise of the forgiveness of sins offered by the Word in baptism. It is worked in infants through the Word spoken by the minister who baptizes them and also by the Word commanding him to baptize - he is acting in obedience to the Word that tells him to baptize all nations, and also that which tells him to bring little children to Jesus (Matt. 19:14, where the Greek word for "little children" is paidion, "infants"). If the Holy Spirit can use the spoken word of the news of Christ's advent to move a baby in the womb to the appropriate response to that Word, then we have proof that the effectiveness of the Holy Spirit is not necessarily tied to articulate intellectual knowledge in the one in whom he works. (Back to questions.)