Soli Deo Gloria

Click here to listen to a sermon about how Redeemer Baptist Church approaches Baptism.


Summary Outline:
Baptism…
1. Is a picture of birth or conversion
2. Is immersion

3. Is for believers
4. Is for the local church
5. Doesn’t save you


1. A Picture of Conversion
“Therefore, just as sin came into the world through one man, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men [or mankind] because all sinned.” (Romans 5:12) We are all sinners. This is the context that Romans 6 comes out of. We are all sons and daughters of Adam and Eve. And Romans 5:12 describes that we all sinned in that original sin of Adam and Eve. Murder, anxiety, fear, pain, death, and the curse of God’s eternal wrath for sin all came into the world when we fell in our first parents. We deserve God’s eternal wrath for our sin, but the contrast of Romans 5 is that Jesus Christ is the Man of Life. There is a great conversion or change that takes place when someone trusts in Christ as Lord and Savior. When God turns us from our sin and we believe in Christ. The Man of Death – Adam – is no longer our identity, but by faith in the substitutionary death and justifying resurrection of Christ we are united to the Man of Life – Jesus Christ – the second Adam.

[B]ut God shows his love for us in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us. Since, therefore, we have now been justified by his blood, much more shall we be saved by him from the wrath of God. For if while we were enemies we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, now that we are reconciled, shall we be saved by his life. More than that, we also rejoice in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have now received reconciliation.” (Romans 5:8-11)

Baptism in Romans 6, then, is a picture of conversion from union with Adam, to union with Christ. Our identity was an identity of death in sin, a vessel of God’s wrath, but through the death and resurrection of Christ our identity is now shaped by Him, and we can grow in obedience to God and in holiness. This is the first aspect of what baptism is; a picture of conversion. Those who have been united to Christ by faith – from death to life – misery and sorrow to joy – slavery to freedom – wrath to peace – burial to resurrection.

2. What Is Baptism? Immersion.
Baptism means “immersion”. Even John Calvin acknowledged this: “Yet the word ‘baptize’ means to immerse, and it is clear that the rite of immersion was observed in the ancient church.”
[1] He rationalizes that churches don’t have to practice immersion to baptize, but that guts the word of it’s biblical meaning and symbolism (cf. Romans 6). The word “baptism” means plunge, dip, wash, or cleanse. [2] There is no disagreement that baptism means immerse. Anglicans generally don’t practice immersion, [3] but the Anglican theologian, Michael Green wrote, “Baptism plunges us into the dying and the rising of the Lord Jesus, and this aspect is particularly clearly emphasized by full immersion.” [4] It’s bizarre to think that “baptism” means immerse, that immersion is what the early church practices, that immersing in water best fits the symbolism of what baptism is meant to represent in the Bible; yet, people say it doesn’t matter how a church baptizes? After 860 pages of writing on baptism in the early church, Everett Ferguson concludes that, “The Christian literary sources, backed by secular word usage and Jewish religious immersions, give an overwhelming support for full immersion as the normal action.” [5] Exceptions were made where there was a lack of water and for the sick and bed-ridden after the New Testament, but for immersion to become the exception rather than the norm is astounding when you consider what the word actually means and how the early church actually practiced it.

Immersion seems to be the plain sense of how Jesus was baptized in Matthew 3:13-17: “And when Jesus was baptized [immersed], immediately he went up from the water, and behold, the heavens were opened to him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove and coming to rest on him; and behold, a voice from heaven said, ‘This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased.’” (cf. Mark 1:10; Luke 3:21-22; John 1:29-34)

Why should we care if baptism is immersion? First, because that’s what the word means, and we want to conform our practice as a church to what the words in the Scriptures actually mean. [6] Second, because immersion is the way that Jesus was baptized, and it’s the way that Jesus’ disciples baptized. Jesus made more disciples than John and more people were being baptized into the baptism of Jesus Christ, even though it was Jesus’ disciples who did the baptizing (John 4:1-2). If this is how Jesus was baptized and how Jesus’ disciples baptized, and it’s part of what Jesus commissioned the disciples to do (Matt. 28:18-20), then we ought to do it the same way. Third, we should baptize by immersion because of the symbolism it employs. Consider Romans 6:3-11:

Do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? We were buried therefore with him by baptism into death, in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, we too might walk in newness of life. For if we have been united with him in a death like his, we shall certainly be united with him in a resurrection like his. We know that our old self [Greek “man”] was crucified with him in order that the body of sin might be brought to nothing, so that we would no longer be enslaved to sin. For one who has died has been set free [Greek “has been justified”] from sin. Now if we have died with Christ, we believe that we will also live with him. We know that Christ, being raised from the dead, will never die again; death no longer has dominion over him. For the death he died he died to sin, once for all, but the life he lives he lives to God. So you also must consider yourselves dead to sin and alive to God in Christ Jesus.” (my emphasis)

Immersion is a picture of the death of our death in the death of Christ. It’s a picture of the gospel that sprinkling and pouring fails to paint. One of the easiest aspects of being a Christian is to simply obey Christ’s command to publicly proclaim your faith in Him and lay back in warm water.

3. For Believers in Jesus Christ
The command to be baptized is coupled with belief:

But when they believed Philip as he preached good news about the kingdom of God and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women. Even Simon [the Magician] himself believed, and after being baptized he continued with Philip. And seeing signs and great miracles performed, he was amazed.” (Acts 8:12-13, my emphasis)

Also:

Crispus, the ruler of the synagogue, believed in the Lord, together with his entire household. And many of the Corinthians hearing Paul believed and were baptized.” (Acts 18:8, my emphasis)

The implication is that everyone in Crispus’ household believed, not that they were baptized regardless of if they were able to believe or in view of the belief of someone else.

There are three main types of baptism in the New Testament – (1) John the Baptist’s Baptism, (2) Baptism in the Holy Spirit, and (3) Christian baptism or baptism into Jesus Christ or the Trinity. [7] John’s baptism was pointing to Jesus Christ’s baptizing with the Holy Spirit. (Mark 1:7-8) This was fulfilled on the day of Pentecost. (Acts 1:4-5) In Acts 19:1-5 Paul found some disciples in Ephesus who were baptized into John’s baptism, but didn’t receive the Holy Spirit, so they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. So, Christian baptism (what Christians do now) is done in view of regeneration, when Jesus gives the Holy Spirit to believers. This doesn’t necessarily mean that we should expect miraculous experiences [8] that we can see when we get baptized (aside from the miracle of new heart and life). It simply means that if you are a Christian, if you are turning from sin and trusting in Christ, you should be baptized based on the profession of your faith. [9] Christian baptism is different than John’s, but there are similarities, specifically that it is done in view of a person’s repentance (Matthew 3:11; Mark 1:4; Luke 3:3), confession of sin and need for forgiveness from God (Mark 1:4; Matthew 3:6; Luke 3:3) in light of God’s coming judgment (Luke 3:7).

What’s the difference between Christian baptism and baptism with the Holy Spirit? Christian baptism is a physical act of going under water that points to the reality that God gives His Holy Spirit to His people (1 Corinthians 3:16; 6:19). It means that someone has converted to Christ, has been born again, or regenerated. So, we baptize those who have received the Holy Spirit. The act of immersing believers in water in the context of a Christian church is so closely tied to becoming a Christian that some references to baptism seem to imply both being immersed into water but also being immersed in the Holy Spirit. Romans 6:1-14 seems to refer to both – water baptism that corresponds to being baptized in the Holy Spirit. [10] Galatians 3:27 makes this same connection, “For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ.” Baptism is an outward picture of an inward reality – a heart that has been immersed, consumed by, and filled with the Holy Spirit by faith in the gospel of Christ. So, (1) John’s baptism found it’s consummation in Jesus and is done. And (3) Christian Baptism (visible/physical) is done in view of believers having received or being (2) baptized with the Holy Spirit (invisible/spiritual).

4. Union to the Church
1 Corinthians 12:12-13 is another passage where physical baptism and baptism in the Holy Spirit both seem to be in view, “For just as the body is one and has many members, and all the members of the body, though many, are one body, so it is with Christ. For in one Spirit we were all baptized into one body—Jews or Greeks, slaves or free—and all were made to drink of one Spirit.” In this passage we also see that the normal practice of baptism happens in the context of a local church. Paul is thinking about the church. Baptism is the entry point into communion with a visible local church. This is one of the reasons why baptism is one of the requirements for church membership, or as our Statement of Faith says, “[Baptism] is pre-requisite to the privileges of a church relation; and to the Lord’s Supper.” (Acts 2:41-42; Matthew 28:19-20; Acts and Epistles) Paul assumes this in Romans 6 too, believers in the New Testament get baptized. The beginning of our church Covenant embodies this truth as well, “Having, as we trust, been brought by Divine grace to repent and believe in the Lord Jesus Christ and to give up ourselves to him, and having been baptized upon our profession of faith, in the name of the Father and of the Son and the Holy Spirit, we do now, relying on His gracious aid, solemnly and joyfully renew our covenant with each other.” This is why if you do much reading on baptism you’ll come across statements like this, “The New Testament has no category for a believer in Jesus Christ who has not been baptized.” [11] And I know there are exceptions, like the thief on the cross (Luke 23:42-43). That said, given the opportunity, the normal posture of the Christian life is to be baptized and that’s how people are added to the church if they haven’t been baptized before.

Baptism is a picture of a person who is identifying with Christ, and uniting to the body of Christ (membership) in a local church. Baptism is the gateway or the doorway not only into the Christian faith, but it is the initiation into membership with a local church. This is one of the reasons why we only invite baptized members of gospel preaching churches to participate in the Lord’s Supper. Acts 2:41-42 illustrates this too, “So those who received his word were baptized, and there were added that day about three thousand souls. And they devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching and the fellowship, to the breaking of bread and the prayers.” Peter exhorted them to repent and be baptized (Acts 2:38). That’s what they did, and this is the action by which they were added or bound (see Matthew 16:19 ; 18:18) these disciples (see Matthew 28:18-20) to the church at Jerusalem (Acts 2:41). 

In Acts 8, Philip baptizes the Ethiopian Eunuch. Some try to argue a number of things that this text is unable to substantiate. This text cannot be used to argue that the regular practice of baptism was to immerse and then send people off into an isolated form of solo-Christianity. Even if it could be used in the case of frontier missionary situations or as an irregular exception it still wouldn’t prove the rule. The normal, regular practice of baptism in a local church is tied to the gospel as it’s proclaimed from the Word of God. This is why we at Redeemer Baptist Church have teachers and preachers of the Word baptize. Philip was part of a local church. He wasn’t just doing his own thing. Baptism was the means by which people were added to the church at Jerusalem. We live in an individualistic age, and we can often miss the corporate aspect of Christianity. Baptism in the early church was an act, a picture of a person’s individual identification with Christ, but it was also the means of being joined to God’s covenant people in the visible church. Not just the invisible universal church, but the local visible church. Ultimately, baptism is part of the mission of the church as well. We see it in Jesus’ Great Commission:

Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age.” (Matthew 28: 18-20)

Baptism is part of discipleship, it involves teaching obedience to everything that Jesus commanded. This doesn’t mean that a candidate for baptism has to know everything, but it does mean they should know how we are saved from God’s eternal wrath through the death and resurrection of Christ alone and nothing we do. They should also know what it means to count the cost of following Christ. We also baptize in the One name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit (Trinity). 

What about Infant Baptism?
Should we baptize infants? Knowing everything we’ve thought about so far, it’s easy to plainly and bluntly say “No.” Infant baptism entered into church practice around 258 A.D. At The Council of Carthage they discussed how infants should be baptized. Infant mortality was high, and the thinking that baptism would remove original sin crept into the church. In 1681 William Kiffin wrote:

It is true that about the third century, from a fatal mistake of John 3:5, ‘Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.’ Some began to bring infant baptism, conceiving that no person, small or great could be saved without it, and that it blotted out all sins committed before its administration. [This is why] Nazianzen exhorts against infant baptism, unless in case of apparent danger of death. When this dismal error once took place, how many mischiefs did follow it.” [13] (my emphasis)

Immersion was dangerous to infants so they discussed the more frequent use of other modes. [14] Adults would even delay baptism until closer to their death, because they wanted to make sure that all their former sins were washed away in baptism. They couldn’t perform immersion for the infant or the bed-ridden, so sprinkling and pouring became more and more common. Kiffin continued:

Now as the consequences of this error have been so fatal to the church of Christ, and as the prevalence of it was gradual, so it ought to be a very serious warning to us, to oppose all the beginnings of error, that is to contend earnestly for the faith once delivered to the saints, because when error is once admitted, it comes with a fair and specious mask or vizard on, to disguise its deformity, till it spreads like a Gangrene, and infects the whole. So this opinion comes disguised with the plausible allegation of charity and brotherly love, but was not the same pretense mainly made use of for the introducing infant baptism, charity to the children’s souls, whom they judged in a state of damnation without it.” [15]

They weren’t thinking of continuity between the Old and New Covenants like many Presbyterian and Reformed friends think today. They were thinking of salvation via sprinkling. Slowly this idea replaced immersion as the most frequent method. They were believing a false gospel that baptism could save from sin and God’s wrath for sin. They were believing that their work and activity of splashing some water on someone could actually save. That’s where infant baptism came from.

Fast-forward to the Reformation in the 15-1600’s. Luther, Zwingli, Calvin, and the rest started to reform churches based on Scripture as opposed to Roman tradition. [16] Some developed the view that baptism is simply the New Covenant replacement of circumcision in the Old Covenant and justified the continuation of infant baptism. This thinking comes especially from Colossians 2:11-12, “In him [Christ] also you were circumcised with a circumcision made without hands, by putting off the body of the flesh, by the circumcision of Christ, having been buried with him in baptism, in which you were also raised with him through faith in the powerful working of God, who raised him from the dead.” Tom Schreiner commented on this text:

The death of Christ is then described as the ‘circumcision of Christ.’ At his death, so to speak, God cut off Christ’s bodily life, just as the foreskin is removed in circumcision. Christ’s bodily life, just as the foreskin is removed in circumcision. The only circumcision believers need, then, is the circumcision they receive by virtue of their incorporation into Christ’s death on the cross. Circumcision was never intended to be a permanent rite for all of redemptive history; it pointed to the death of Christ on behalf of his people. The demand for (Deut 10:16; Jer 4:4) and promise of a circumcised heart (Deut 30:6) have now become a reality in the cross. Christ’s cross is the true circumcision for believers. This accords with what we shall see in Galatians where circumcision is fulfilled in the cross of Christ…Baptism, as the initiatory event in the lives of believers represents death to the old way of life and the birth of a new life. Baptism, however, is not only an event in which the objective nature of Christ’s saving work is applied to his people. It is also conjoined with the subjective appropriation of such salvation. Paul adds in v. 12 that the effectiveness of Christ’s work is accessed through faith. It is difficult to see, then, how infants can fit with what Paul says since they cannot exercise faith. Those who support infant baptism rightly see the objective work of God’s grace in Christ’s death and resurrection that is applied in baptism, but they delay the subjective appropriation of God’s gift by faith. Such a view truncates, as we have now seen in several texts, the fullness of the biblical witness.” [17]

Paul isn’t saying that the Old and New Covenants are exactly the same, but that there are similarities. One pointed to Christ, one is based on the fulfillment by Christ. Physical circumcision in the Old Testament was meant to be representative of a circumcised heart (Deuteronomy 10:16; 20:2-4; 30:1, 6). A heart that loved God, a heart that was set apart for God. But circumcision was applied to all of Abraham’s offspring, even those who didn’t believe. It was part of the covenant of works. But baptism signifies the covenant of grace forged in the blood of Christ (Matthew 26:28; Mark 14:24; Luke 22:20; 1 Corinthians 11:25; Hebrews 12:24; 13:20). Baptism is never applied to children as physical descendants of Christians in the New Testament even if they may grow up and not believe in Christ. We never see this kind of logic in the New Testament. Even the Presbyterian theologian B. B. Warfield wrote:

It is true, that there is no express command to baptize infants in the New Testament, no express record of baptism of infants, and no passages so stringently imply it that we must infer from them that infants were baptized.” [18]

He argues that the mandate comes from the Old Covenant, arguing that it would have been common sense or a safe assumption to just think that baptism replaced circumcision as a covenant sign is an argument from silence and off point. First, the New Testament church was constantly confused about the relationship of the Old Covenant to the New Covenant. If baptism were simply meant to be exactly the same type of ordinance as circumcision we should expect that the Apostles would have made this clear. [19] Second, the New Covenant is a better covenant than the Old (Hebrews 7:22; 8:6; 12:24). It’s more precisely applied. This doesn’t justify individualistic “solo-Christianity” without the corporate life of the covenant community in the church, but in the Bible there is never an assumption that someone doesn’t profess faith by repentance and belief in Jesus Christ when they are baptized. Paul is saying that baptism points to the kind of heart that circumcision was supposed to be pointing to only more precisely. The Old Covenant pointed to the New Covenant, but the New Covenant is truly new and unique. The New Covenant is applied to believers through Christ’s blood. So, baptism isn’t something that we apply to everyone in our families or everyone who attends the church. It’s for believers. Baptism isn’t something that is separate from conversion and visible faith. We don’t believe that the church supplies the faith, that baptism infuses faith, that infants necessarily have faith until proven otherwise, that baptism precedes faith, or that baptism guarantees faith. [20] What many call infant “baptism” isn’t baptism. I had a conversation with a Presbyterian friend a while ago about baptism, and he started out by saying, “We’re baptists too.” The Bible would agree with my friend in the cases that they immerse believers. If that’s not happening, well, it’s not true.

So, how should we respond to those want to join our church who were aspersed or sprinkled as infants? We would encourage them to be baptized – immersed as a believer. We don’t advocate rebaptism (Ephesians 4:4-5). But if someone wasn’t a believer when he or she was immersed, was an infant when he or she was sprinkled, or if he or she was a believer when they were sprinkled we want to gently and lovingly encourage them to be baptized for the first time. This leads to the last point.

5. Baptism Doesn’t Save You
If baptism was required for salvation then Jesus’ words to the thief on the cross, “Today you will be with me in paradise,” (Luke 23:43) was an empty lie. If baptism was required for salvation why would Paul say, “For Christ did not send me to baptize but to preach the gospel, and not with words of eloquent wisdom, lest the cross of Christ be emptied of its power.” (1 Corinthians 1:17) It’s not that baptism isn’t important, it is, but it’s not the gospel – baptism isn’t what saves us. It points to the gospel, it’s a picture of the power of the gospel in the heart and life of a believer, but it’s not the gospel. Christ’s death and resurrection to reconcile sinners to God is the the message of the gospel. Some claim that baptism saves. They may point to passages like 1 Peter 3:21, “Baptism, which corresponds to this, now saves you, not as a removal of dirt from the body but as an appeal to God for a good conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ.” We can’t remove that verse from it’s context. The thing that baptism corresponds to is what saves, namely the death and resurrection of Christ. The physical act of immersion in water is done as an appeal for a good conscience to God. It’s a pledge that someone can cognitively make in the context of the covenant community of a visible church. It’s not a pledge that another group or another individual can make for someone else. It’s both individual and corporate at the same time. This principle should balance us out if we’re tempted to over individualize or over corporatize baptism. Baptism doesn’t save, and Peter isn’t saying that it does. He even says baptism doesn’t have the power to wash us clean (implying wash away our sins) like the removal of dirt from the body. Baptism points to faith in the death and resurrection of Christ.

This is another reason why baptism is only for believers. If you don’t see your sin, if you haven’t experienced conviction for your sin, and you aren’t confessing your sin and asking God to forgive you for your sin through the death and resurrection of Christ, you shouldn’t be baptized. Salvation is by faith alone, through the work of Christ alone. What can wash away your sin? Can immersion in water in front of a church? No, nothing but the blood of Jesus. Be careful to think about baptism well. If you struggle with assurance of salvation, be encouraged by looking back at what your baptism represented as a pledge your heart and mind was involved with, not the fact that you were baptized. Look back, and remember your faith in Christ. Remember the power of God in the gospel for the salvation of those who believe. Remember the pain and sorrows our Lord took for us. Remember God’s electing love that He set upon all those who believe before the foundation of the world (Ephesians 1:4). Remember God’s grace to you in sending Christ. Remember what your baptism corresponded to – your faith in Christ, an appeal for a good conscience washed clean through the blood of Christ. And then look at the present. Are you trusting in Christ today? Is the gospel still your hope? Be encouraged not by what you’ve done, but by your hope in Christ.


Notes:
[1] Calvin, John Institutes of the Christian Religion, Library of Christian Classics Volume 2 trans. F. L. Battles, ed. John T. .McNeill (Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 1960), 1320.
[2] Bauer, Walter A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Liturature, 3rd Edition (BDAG) ed. Frederick W. Danker (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000), 164-5.
[3] Not that they are opposed to it, but because they generally practice aspersion (“sprinkling”) of infants.
[4] Green, Michael Baptism: Its Purpose, Practice, and Power (Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1987), 49.
[5] Ferguson, Everett Baptism in the Early Church: History, Theology, and Liturgy in the First Five Centuries (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2009), 857. I disagree with some of Ferguson’s theological conclusions regarding baptism.
[6] Note that this is not a rejection of the grammatical-historical method. A “plain sense” or “literary sense” does not mean the rejection of context in exegesis and interpretation at expense of literary genre. For example, the Bible’s use of anthropomorphisms, metaphor, analogy, allegory, etc.
[7] Jesus uses baptism as a metaphor for suffering as well (Mark 10:38-39). This is likely part of what it means to be baptized or “immersed” in the Holy Spirit inwardly, which is what the physical act of Christian baptism is meant to outwardly display. This was a specific prophesy of Christ to His followers that came true as they died as martyrs for the faith, but we should also expect sufferings and persecutions to accompany our lives if we would be Christians (Matthew 5:1-12; John 15:18; Acts 9:16; Romans 5:2-5; implied 6:1-14; 8:12-39; 1 Corinthians 6:7; 12:26; 2 Corinthians 1:3-7; Philippians 1:29; 3:10; 1 Thessalonians 2:14; 2 Thessalonians 1:5; 2 Timothy 1:8; 2 Timothy 2:3; 3:12; 4:5; James 1; 5; 1 Peter 2-5; etc.).
[8] Like speaking in tongues, feeling or seeing unique power, tingling, convulsions, or something else.
[9] We don’t hold that baptism has to take place as soon as someone believes. The early church baptized almost immediately (Acts 2:38, 41; 8:12-13, 36, 38; 9:18; 10:47-48; 11:16; 16:15, 33; 18:8; 22:16), even if the church was not gathered (Acts 8:36, 38; 9:18; 16:33) [Akin, Daniel L. The Meaning of Baptism in Restoring Integrity in Baptist Churches ed. Thomas White, Jason G. Duesing, and Malcolm B. Yarnell III (Grand Rapids: Kregel Academic & Professional, 2008), 63.]. That said, other biblical-theologically wise considerations should be applied as well (priesthood of believers, believers’ church, etc.). Therefore we at Redeemer Baptist Church do not do spontaneous immediate unplanned baptisms. Also, because of confusion about what baptism is, does, and because baptism has been so poorly taught in many churches throughout history, we believe it is biblically wise to have a period of teaching (either publicly or individually) and discipleship before we would encourage someone to obey Christ’s command to be baptized. Further, we would encourage children to wait until they are older.
[10] Schreiner, Thomas R. Romans, Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament Volume 6 (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 1998), 306-7.
[11] Akin, Daniel L. The Meaning of Baptism in Restoring Integrity in Baptist Churches ed. Thomas White, Jason G. Duesing, and Malcolm B. Yarnell III (Grand Rapids: Kregel Academic & Professional, 2008), 63. Akin is quoting G R. Beasley-Murray. See also: Schreiner, Thomas R. Romans, Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament Volume 6 (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 1998), 306. “The reference to baptism is introduced as a designation for those who are believers in Christ. Since unbaptized Christians were virtually nonexistent, to refer to those who were baptized is another way of describing those who are Christians, those who have put their faith in Christ.” 

[13] Kiffin, William A Sober Discourse of Right to Church-Communion (London: Rose & Crown, 1681), 72-3.
[14] Other modes of baptism, like pouring, were used earlier; however, it wasn’t preferred or the norm: “Now concerning baptism, baptize as follows: after you have reviewed all these things, baptize in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit in running water. But if you have no running water, then baptize in some other water; and if you are not able to baptize in cold water, then do so in warm. But if you have neither, then pour water on the head three times in the name of Father and Son and Holy Spirit. And before the baptism let the one baptizing and the one who is to be baptized fast, as well as any others who are able. Also, you must instruct the one who is to be baptized to fast for one or two days before hand.” Didache, The teaching of the Lord to the Gentiles by the twelve apostles in The Apostolic Fathers, Greek Texts and English Translations 3rd Edition ed. and trans. Michael W. Holmes (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2007), 355.
[15] Kiffin, William A Sober Discourse of Right to Church-Communion (London: Rose & Crown, 1681), 75.
[16] Think Sola Scriptura and the Regulative Principle.
[17] Schreiner, Thomas R. Baptism in the epistles: An Initiation Rite for Believers in Believer’s Baptism Ed. Thomas R. Schreiner and Shawn D. Wright (Nashville: B & H Academic, 2006), 76-8.
[18] 
Warfield, Benjamin Breckinridge Studies in Theology, The Works of Benjamin B. Warfield Volume 9 (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 2003), 399.
[19] Johnson, Jeffrey D. The Fatal Flaw of the Theology Behind Infant Baptism & Covenantal Dichotomism Continuity and Discontinuity of the Divine Covenants (Conway: Free Grace Press, 2010), 30-3.
[20] Ibid.
, 4-5.


Image credit: http://bit.ly/1FbT2sL