𝐁𝐚𝐩𝐭𝐢𝐬𝐦: 𝐈𝐭𝐬 𝐓𝐡𝐞𝐨𝐥𝐨𝐠𝐲, 𝐇𝐢𝐬𝐭𝐨𝐫𝐲, 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐏𝐫𝐚𝐜𝐭𝐢𝐜𝐞

𝐁𝐚𝐩𝐭𝐢𝐬𝐦: 𝐈𝐭𝐬 𝐓𝐡𝐞𝐨𝐥𝐨𝐠𝐲, 𝐇𝐢𝐬𝐭𝐨𝐫𝐲, 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐏𝐫𝐚𝐜𝐭𝐢𝐜𝐞

Introduction

Baptism has been one of the most enduring and defining practices of the Christian faith throughout history. Instituted by Christ Himself and practiced by the apostles, baptism marks the believer’s entrance into the community of faith and symbolizes the inward reality of salvation. Yet, despite its central role in Christian identity and worship, baptism has been the subject of intense debate and varied interpretation across centuries and traditions.

What does baptism truly signify? Is it merely an outward ritual, or does it carry deeper theological meaning? Why did the early Christians place such importance on it, even to the point of undergoing rigorous instruction and spiritual preparation before receiving it? And how have its form and practice evolved from the days of Jewish ritual purification, through the apostolic period, the early church, medieval Christendom, the Reformation, and into the modern era?

This study seeks to explore the theology, history, and practice of baptism in a comprehensive and biblically faithful way. We will begin by tracing its Jewish roots and examining how John the Baptist and Jesus redefined the practice. From there, we move through the early church's understanding, its doctrinal significance, and the theological disputes that shaped its expression. Particular attention is given to the development of baptismal practices — from full immersion to affusion, from adult confession to infant initiation — and how these reflect varying theological frameworks.

More than a ritual, baptism is a public proclamation of allegiance to Christ, a symbolic burial and resurrection, a sign of cleansing and new birth. It is an act of obedience that bears witness to an inward transformation, marking the beginning of a life lived under the Lordship of Jesus.

In a time when the church is re-examining its roots and seeking authentic expressions of discipleship, rediscovering the original meaning and practice of baptism is not only timely — it is essential. This study invites us to return to the Scriptures and the witness of the early Church to recapture the richness, seriousness, and beauty of this vital ordinance.

        I.            𝐇𝐢𝐬𝐭𝐨𝐫𝐢𝐜𝐚𝐥 𝐑𝐨𝐨𝐭𝐬 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐉𝐞𝐰𝐢𝐬𝐡 𝐂𝐨𝐧𝐭𝐞𝐱𝐭

 1.       Ritual Baths 150 BCE–50 AD

Jewish ritual washings (mikvahs) before temple worship prefigured baptism. These washings emphasized purification, spiritual readiness, and holiness before God.

Many ritual baths from the early Roman period have been found in the Jerusalem excavations.76 The elaboration of the laws of ritual purity thus evolved between c. 100 BCE and 50 CE, reflecting the concerns of priests, Pharisees, and Essenes in matters of bodily purity. They are preserved in the Mishnah tractate Miqva’ ot and the Tosefta of the same name. There is no Talmudic tractate on Miqva’ ot.[1]

2.       The Proselyte Baptism in the Jewish Community

Gentile converts to Judaism underwent ritual washing as part of their conversion, symbolizing a break from paganism and entrance into the covenant community.

Getting circumcised changes one's basic status with regard to all the other commandments of the law. One is no longer outside the people of Israel; one is inside, and therefore has to relate to the entire law, not just Noahide or other commandments considered valid for all people. Jews were not alone in being circumcised in antiquity, but they were unique in making this their most distinctive and indispensable marker of national identity. Therefore "the circumcision" (ή περιτομή) is often used as a short and sufficient reference to the Jewish people, while the Gentiles are referred to as "the foreskin" (ή άκροβυστία).[2]

But how were female converts to Judaism recognized as such? The lack of a clear answer to this question may have prompted the development of a new element in the conversion rites; the proselyte's immersion. The date at which this rite was "instituted" as obligatory for women as well as men is disputed. Perhaps this question is formulated on a wrong premise, that proselyte immersion was "instituted" at a specific point in time. In the life of a proselyte there always had to be a first immersion by which the proselyte for the first time in his/her life was made ritually clean. One could well imagine that this first immersion was gradually invested with more significance, and thus became an integral part of the conversion ritual through an extended process rather than by a sudden halakic decision.[3]

It is difficult to know when the Jews began to practice proselyte baptism as an initiation rite for Gentile converts to Judaism, so we cannot assume it was a precursor of John's and Christian baptism. It appears that the import of this practice was both purificatory—Gentiles were generally considered to be ritually unclean and in need of purification—and initiatory. Also, proselyte baptism conveyed the notion of a conversion to a new kind of life, which involved the proselyte's acceptance of the “yoke of the Torah.” Unlike Jewish proselyte baptism of Gentile converts to Judaism, however, John baptized Jews, not Gentiles. Most likely, John's baptism and Jewish proselyte baptism both harken back to Jewish ritual cleansing and bathing practices. This is supported by mishnaic passages such as m. Pesah. 8:8. Unlike John's baptism, however, these rites were repeated and self-administered. It may be concluded, therefore, that the early Church's practice of baptism cannot be adequately explained by, or accounted for, by appealing to proselyte baptism as a precedent. Apart from the question of whether or not proselyte baptism predates Christian baptism (which is far from certain), there are important theological distinctions in the way in which baptism was conceived that makes a link between these two kinds of baptism tenuous at best and illegitimate at worst.[4]

3.       Is John Related to the Qumran Community?

Some scholars propose that John the Baptist had connections to the Qumran sect, which practiced regular purification rituals and expected the Messiah.

The ministry of the Baptist in the Desert of Judea in the 20s brought him into close geographical proximity to the Qumran settlement at a time when it flourished. He is described in the New Testament with a phrase from Is 40: 3 ("In the wilderness prepare the way of the Lord") also used by the Qumran sectarians to describe their role in the desert (lQS 8 : 12-14). His characteristic action of baptizing shares common features with the initiatory lustrations at Qumran: (a) the external ablution is useless without repentance; (b) it is given to Jews, not to pagan converts; (c) it is designed to set up a penitent nucleus in Israel for the coming of God; (d) it is preliminary to a dispensation of God's spirit.t6 Of course, there are differences too, for John's baptism is on a more universal scale and without the trappings of monasticism. It is not implausible that the Baptist received his general orientation from baptizing sectarians such as those at Qumran,17 and then in the light of his own prophetic call adapted these ideas to a more universal eschatological mission. We may also note that the Benedictus (Lk 1 : 68-79}-a hymn in praise of John the Baptist which many scholars suggest was composed by his followers but subsequently adapted by Christians-is similar in its structure and mosaic style to Qumran hymns pieced together from the Old Testament.[5]

4.       Baptism in the Qumran Community

Most of the Qumran literature was composed and copied before the composition of the first Christian literature (c. A.D. 50). A dating of the Scrolls to the Middle Ages or to the period after the destruction of the Second Temple is untenable. The identification of the sectarians who composed the Scrolls with the Essenes approaches certainty in our judgment, but this identification is not absolutely necessary for discussing relationships with the New  Testament. What is certain is that the sectarians were not Christians, nor is there any evidence of Christian influence on their writings. They were Jews of strict legal observance, strongly apocalyptic in outlook, with a strain of ethical and eschatological dualism that ultimately may have been of Iranian origin.[6]

At Qumran (e.g., the Dead Sea Scrolls community), baptism-like rites focused on purification and readiness for God’s kingdom, anticipating Christian baptism but differing in meaning.

In the Qumran community “the primary function of most if not all of the lustrations [ritual baths/washing] was to remove ceremonial uncleanness caused by daily living or contact with unclean objects.”[7]

The community held purity to be so important that new members had to undertake a three-year initiation process in order to thoroughly remove all impurity and to make sure that they could live by the community rules.

Several passages in the Dead Sea Scrolls indicate that the sectarians practiced immersion in water for the purposes of purification. According to the Community Rule (iQS 3.4-6), those who rejected the covenant were denied admission to the community: “He shall not be reckoned among the perfect; he shall neither be purified by atonement (kippurim), nor cleansed by purifying waters (or sprinkling waters; met niddah), nor sanctified by seas and rivers, nor washed clean with any ablution (or bathing waters; mei rahatz). Unclean, unclean shall he be. For as long as he despises the precepts of God he shall receive no instruction in the Community of His counsel.” The next passage describes admission to the community: “ For it is through the spirit of true counsel concerning the ways of man that all his sins shall be expiated. And when his flesh is sprinkled with purifying water (mei niddah) and sanctified by cleansing water (mei doche), it shall be made clean by the humble submission of his soul to all the precepts of God” (iQS 3.7-9).[8]

7c Whoever enter the council of the Community 8 enters the covenant of God in the presence of all who freely volunteer. He shall swear with a binding oath to revert to the Law of Moses with all that it decrees, with whole 9 heart and whole soul[9]

There was no ground for half-hearted commitment in this community. Members had to make a complete break from their old and corrupt way and turn fully to God. This had to be done before the person was even allowed to start the initiation process. Throughout the process the initiate, as well as the whole community would take daily immersions, so that they would maintain their purity; only the full members of the community were allowed to partake of the holy meal after they were clean. Once the initiate had completed the process, they took a final immersion as an initiate and then became full members of the community. Geza Vermes notes that “this seems to have been a peculiar and solemn act similar to Christian baptism, and to have symbolized purification by the ‘spirit of holiness[10]

These passages indicate that the Qumran community associated external cleansing with the spiritual transformation demanded of its members. This means that the sectarians did not distinguish between cultic and moral impurity. The community’s laws treat transgressing divine law not as a metaphor for becoming unclean, but as an actual source of impurity. If a member transgressed any part of the community’s laws, he was excluded from the “purity” (that is, the pure food or drink) of the sect and required a rite of purification.

To the sectarians, purity and impurity were manifestations of the moral state of the individual. For example, passages in several scrolls (such as 4QThrAi and lQH 1:32) attest to their belief that skin disease (Hebrew saraat) is caused by sin or an evil spirit. The sectarian view that anyone who transgressed divine law was impure is expressed elsewhere in the Community Rule (5.13-14): “They shall not enter the water to partake of the pure Meal of the men of holiness, for they shall not be cleansed unless they turn from their wickedness: for all who transgress His word are unclean’ (my emphasis). For the sectarians, immersion for the purposes of purification was ineffective unless it was accompanied by spiritual repentance. Many scholars have noted the similarities between sectarian views of purification and those associated with John the Baptist, who was active in the vicinity of Qumran during the 1st century and might even have been a member of the community at some point (though this is a matter of controversy). However, in Christianity, baptism became a one-time penitential purification, as opposed to the repeated immersions and other purification rites required in Judaism.[11]

For this community, purity was only maintained through extreme moral, religious, and physical purity. The daily immersions served as a way for the community to maintain their high standards for purity and made sure that they were constantly and actively living in piety towards God. Purity was both a moral and physical act in the community [12]

5.       Baptizing the Dead – 1 Corinthians 15:29

This puzzling reference suggests that some Corinthian Christians practiced proxy baptisms for the dead, a practice Paul mentions without explicitly endorsing or condemning.

This verse is one of the most debated in the New Testament. Interpretations fall into a few categories:

• Literal vicarious baptism: Some in Corinth may have practiced baptism on behalf of deceased believers who had not been baptized. Paul mentions it without explicitly condemning or approving it—he seems to use it rhetorically.
• Metaphorical view: Some scholars think “baptism for the dead” might be symbolic—perhaps referring to baptism in the face of death, or in hope of resurrection.
• Group solidarity: Others suggest it refers to people converting because of the faithful witness of deceased Christians.

Early Church Reception:

• The early church fathers (e.g., Tertullian, Chrysostom) generally rejected or criticized the idea of vicarious baptism.
• It did not become a mainstream Christian practice in orthodoxy.

Most interpreters take the phrase as a reference to some sort of baptismal ritual on behalf of relatives or friends who had recently died.[13]

This passage has prompted many suggestions about what Paul is referring to by this baptism for the dead.[91] Some include:

1.       Baptizing living believers on behalf of loved ones or ancestors who have died

2.       An aberrant practice of baptism among the Corinthians that adopted pagan rituals of baptizing for the dead

3.       Washing corpses in preparation for burial to demonstrate the honor of the physical body, which will be resurrected

4.       Honorary, posthumous baptism for believers who had died prior to being baptized

5.       Baptism of living converts to take the place of those who had gone on ahead, in anticipation of a reunion of all believers of every age after the resurrection

6.       Baptism in honor of a martyr who had impacted a believer in a special way[14]

However, Cornelius R. Stam is of different view and he says, “ Ver. 29 states clearly that there were people (however few) at that time who were "baptized for the dead." These were not pagans, or the argument would be meaningless. But among the believers there were some who practiced this superstitious custom, in which a living believer was baptized for another believer who had died before being baptized. Whatever the reasons for this practice; whatever its origin, certain believers were being baptized for others who had died without baptism. Thus the apostle, arguing for the truth of the resurrection, asks, "What shall they do?" i.e., when it becomes evident that there is no resurrection. They would be refuting their own beliefs. Obviously, they submit to this baptism with the resurrection of the saints in view.[15]

Paul implies that such a baptism is of no use to those who receive it, they will not benefit by it. They that are baptized, the present tense indicates that the action regularly occurs and is known to every Corinthian. For the dead may mean: for the benefit of the dead. The objection that the apostle could not have meant anything like a baptism for the benefit of others is exegetically out of place. Moreover, Paul does not approve of that kind of baptism, he simply mentions that it occurs. On the other hand, if this type of baptism was actually practiced and if Paul had disapproved of it he probably would have written more about it than what this one reference contains. In any case the apostle could hardly derive an argument for the resurrection of the body from a practice of which he did not approve. The rendering "for the benefit of the dead" does not appear tenable.[16]

Interpretations abound but no one has succeeded in giving an interpretation which is generally accepted. It is impossible to mention everything that has been written about this verse in the course of the years, nor do we pretend to offer an interpretation that overcomes every objection. A few observations, however, may perhaps give a measure of insight in the questions that are at stake here.[17]

Paul's first letter to the Corinthians is addressed to a fractured and confused community, in which social and theological divisions had led to moral scandals and sacrilege. The Corinthians’ bad behavior, however, is our spiritual gain because Paul's response to it includes some of the New Testament's most memorable passages on themes as fundamental as love and the resurrection. Indeed, one of the most serious of the Corinthian errors the denial of the resurrection of the dead prompted the apostle to compose an impassioned defense of this belief. In the midst of Paul's affirmation of the resurrection of Christ and of his followers, we also find one of the New Testament's most puzzling verses. Continuing a line of argument that begins with the rhetorical question, “How can some of you say there is no resurrection of the dead?” (15:12), Paul goes on to ask, “Otherwise, what do people mean by being baptized on behalf of the dead? If the dead are not raised at all, why are people baptized on their behalf?”(15:29).[18]

Those "who receive baptism on behalf of the dead" (v. 29) appear to be the Corinthians who were baptized vicariously on behalf of deceased friends or relatives. It is clear from 1 Cor 1:13-17 that some members of the Corinthian assembly were keen on baptism of some sort. It also seems clear from the language in 10:1-4, and from Paul's sharp reaction to it in 10:5-13, that some Corinthians understood the Exodus narrative in explicitly spiritualizing terms, apparently even as a "baptism in the cloud and sea" (cf. 10:1-2). As noted above, Hellenistic Jews such as Philo understood the cloud and rock and the spiritual drink as Sophia, and the Exodus through the sea as the freeing of the soul from the body involving the agency of Sophia (the cloud). It is tempting to conclude, by analogy, that certain Corinthians viewed baptism as a rite that freed soul from body or from mortal corruptible realities in general, and that involved the agency of Sophia.[19]

Some suggest a reference to baptism for catechumens who died before baptism; although early Christian baptism was probably normally immediate (e.g., Acts 22:16), some take it as less urgent in Corinth (1 Cor 1:14). Although we lack evidence for vicarious baptisms, one ancient text analogously allows prayer for the dead, which is unreasonable “If ” (in so many words) “the dead are not raised” (2 Macc 12:43–45).[20]

Some of the church Fathers are familiar with vicarious baptism as a heretical practice; thus, Chrysostom knows of it as a custom of the Marcionites.[21]

While others suggest that, “Paul refers to normal Christian baptism, though in an odd way that has misled many interpreters.”[22]

The reason is that if Paul intended to refer to Christian baptism, he has done so very oddly. Literally, he refers to “those who are being baptized for the dead ones.” Normally, he would talk about being baptized for sin, and it sounds like the dead ones and those baptized are separate people. However, they are probably references to the same individual. His clumsy insertion of “the dead ones” could just be Paul’s attempt to insert irony into his argument that has in the end thrown interpreters onto a wild-goose chase to understand it.[23]

Up to 200 explanations have been given of this verse! Most of these interpretations are inane, prompted by a desire to conform this verse to an orthodox doctrine of baptism. It is clear from the context, however, that Paul distinguished his own practice and teaching from that described here. He merely held up the teaching of being "baptized for the dead" as a practice of some who denied the Resurrection. How the false teachers came to this view may never be known, but just across the Saronic Gulf, north of Corinth, lay Eleusis, the center of an ancient mystery religion lauded by Homer ... and widely popular.... Part of the rites of initiation into this pagan religion were washings of purification in the sea without which no one could hope to experience bliss in the life hereafter (cf. Pindar Fragment 212; Sophocles Fragment 753). A vicarious participation in the mysteries was not unknown either (cf. Orphica Fragment 245). Given the Corinthian propensity for distortion in matters of church practice (11:2-14:40), it was likely that some in Corinth (possibly influenced by the Eleusinian mystery) were propounding a false view of baptism which Paul took up and used as an argument against those who denied the Resurrection. No interpretation of this text is entirely satis factory, but this view has as its chief strength the natural reading of the Greek verse, an asset singularly lacking in other explanations. Also it is noteworthy that Paul referred to "those" (not "we") who are "baptized for the dead."[24]

We can be sure, for example, that it does not teach vicarious, or proxy, baptism for the dead, as claimed by ancient gnostic heretics such as Marcion and by the Mormon church today. Paul did not teach that a person who has died can be saved, or helped in any way, by another person’s being baptized in his behalf. Baptismal regeneration, the idea that one is saved by being baptized, or that baptism is in some way necessary for salvation, is unscriptural. The idea of vicarious baptismal regeneration is still further removed from biblical truth. If a person cannot save himself by being baptized, he certainly cannot save anyone else through that act. Salvation is by personal faith in Jesus Christ alone. “For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God” (Eph. 2:8; cf. Rom. 3:28; etc.). That is the repeated and consistent teaching of both the Old and New Testaments. Quoting from Genesis 15:6, Paul says, “For what does the Scripture say? ‘And Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned to him as righteousness’” (Rom. 4:3). The only way any person has ever come to God is by personal faith.[25] If we assume that Paul was using the term baptized in that sense, then those … who are baptized could refer to those who were giving testimony that they were Christians. In other words, he was simply referring to believers under the title of those who are baptized, not to some special act of baptism. The dead could also refer to Christians, to deceased believers whose lives were a persuasive testimony leading to the salvation of the baptized. This seems to be a reasonable view that does no injustice to the text or context.[26]

Finally, There is only a single text of Scripture that mentions baptism for the dead. As an aside to his argument for the resurrection in 1 Corinthians 15, Paul says, “What will those do who are baptized for the dead? If the dead are not raised at all, why then are they baptized for them?” (v. 29). More than one explanation of this cryptic reference has been proposed. Some have suggested that Paul is referring to a Christian practice of being baptized in honor of believers who have died. It seems rather unlikely that Christians would practice baptism for dead believers, since those Christian believers would have been baptized during their lifetimes. Careful study of these verses in the larger context of 1 Corinthians and the cultural background of Corinth suggests that Paul was most likely alluding to a pagan practice with which the Corinthians were familiar. Paul does not say “we Christians” or “you Christians,” but “those … who are baptized for the dead.” The fact that pagans—almost certainly in the context of the popular mystery religions—practiced baptism for the dead suggests to Paul that perhaps even some pagans believe in a physical resurrection to come. Paul does not approve of the practice; he simply mentions it in passing. We must not build any Christian doctrine or practice around an obscure reference such as this.[27]

       II.            𝐁𝐚𝐩𝐭𝐢𝐬𝐦 𝐢𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐍𝐞𝐰 𝐓𝐞𝐬𝐭𝐚𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐄𝐚𝐫𝐥𝐲 𝐂𝐡𝐫𝐢𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐚𝐧𝐢𝐭𝐲

 1.       Baptism in the Gospels

John’s baptism prepared the way for Christ by calling for repentance. Jesus’ own baptism inaugurated His public ministry and affirmed His identity as the Son of God.

All four canonical Gospels present John the Baptist as a prophet, warning sinners of imminent crisis, preaching repentance, baptizing (baptizein =“to dip in water”), and proclaiming the one who was to come after him. The baptism that John offered appears to have been a symbolic, bodily cleansing that signified the recipient’s repentance and desire for forgiveness of his or her sins. Although the rite appears to be unprecedented, the texts do not imply that John’s audience found his words or actions inexplicable. Certain other passages from the Synoptic Gospels suggest that witnesses were confused about the authority by which John acted, asking whether it was “from heaven” or of “human origin” (cf. Matt. 21:25; Mark 11:30; Luke 20:4). Yet, since the initial accounts of Jesus’s baptism offer neither explanation for the ritual nor defense of John’s role, it seems the Baptist rite was understood in his own milieu (or at least retrospectively to the authors or redactors of the narratives).[28]

John also announces that his baptism is preparatory: someone to come after him would surpass him. This one, whose sandals he was unworthy to untie, would baptize not with water but with the Holy Spirit. Matthew and Luke add that he would also baptize with fire. John likens this baptism of fire to the fire that burns chaff off wheat before it can be gathered into the granary (Matt. 3:11–12; Luke 3:17–18). John’s Gospel lacks an account of Jesus’s baptism but reports that when the Pharisees interrogate John about his authority to baptize, John testifies that he baptized with water in order to reveal another one (a man who was already standing among them)—the Son of God, who would baptize with the Holy Spirit (John 1:24–31). Without saying that he baptized Jesus, John identified him as the Lamb of God, who would take away the sins of the world, the one who ranked before him (because he came before him), and upon whom John himself saw the Spirit descend in the form of a dove. Based on these different narratives, early Christian readers would have interpreted John’s baptism, on one hand, as cleansing or expiatory or, on the other, as transitional, and eschatological.[29]

Before Jesus came to be baptized, John’s proffered baptism in water was essentially penitential and signaled an individual’s repentance and desire for forgiveness. The Gospels do not present John as performing an initiatory rite that granted membership in an exclusive community, a permanent spiritual (or bodily) transformation, or a one-time, nonrepeatable act. Moreover, John foretells a future baptism given by one mightier than he, which would substantially differ from what he offers: a baptism in the Holy Spirit (and fire). Thus, while John’s baptism serves as a prototype for later Christian baptism, it does so only in respect to its offering reconciliation to sinners[30]

 Matthew

The chief disagreement is in the representation of Matthew over against that of Mark and Luke. In 3:14-15 Matthew in- troduces an exchange of words between John and Jesus, a little scene which changes entirely the character of the incident; we may, for convenience' sake, call it Matthew's recognition scene. According to Matthew, the Baptist recognizes Jesus at the Jordan as the Coming One whom he has been announcing. Consequently, the Baptist hesitates to baptize Jesus; but Je- sus assures him that it should be so, "for thus it becometh us to fulfil all righteousness." That the Baptist recognized Jesus at the Jordan is contradicted by the Baptist's subsequent con- duct: the Baptist never resigns in Jesus' favor, nor does he become Jesus' disciple. This recognition scene is not found in our oldest account of the baptism, Mark; nor is it found in Luke. The scene is evidently an unhistorical, later addition by Matthew, and for a reason [31]

Mark

Direct references to baptism in the Gospels of Mark1 and Luke are few, but their significance should not be underestimated. They include references to the literal rite of baptism and metaphorical uses.[32]

A significant number of all occurrences of the bapt- word group in Mark's Gospel are found in Mark 1:4–9.7 Mark's conflated quotation of Mal 3:1 and Isa 40:3 identifies John the Baptist as God's messenger sent to “prepare the way for the Lord.” Mark 1:4 immediately adds that, in keeping with these prophetic passages, “John came baptizing in the wilderness and preaching a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins” (see Acts 19:4). [33]

If we consult Mark's account of the incident, we see that the baptism is by no means at once messianic in character. In Mark there is no series of messianic tests immediately follow- ing to throw a messianic light on the Jordan scene. In Mark the baptism is followed by a period of temptation (1: 12-13), but Mark gives us no hint as to the character and nature of the temptations through which Jesus passed. Mark gives only the most general kind of notice concerning this period following the Jordan incident: Jesus "was in the wilderness forty days tempted of Satan." In Mark, then, the Jordan experience of Jesus is not a messianic moment; Jesus' messianic conscious- ness and conviction do not date from the baptism; it is not the messianic call that brings Jesus into public; the whole of Je- sus' public life is not to be regarded as messianic. In short, it is impossible to regard the Jordan incident in Mark as messi- anic without making a radical revision of the whole of Mark's Galilean life of Jesus that would destroy its progress and its principal point[34]

2.       Did Jesus Need Baptism?

Although sinless, Jesus submitted to baptism to fulfill all righteousness, identify with humanity, and foreshadow His death and resurrection.

If baptism was for sinners, why did Jesus seek it? This awkward question appears implicitly, even prior to the final stages of textual redaction in the Gospel of Matthew, where John is resistant to baptizing Jesus: “I need to be baptized by you, and do you come to me?” (Matt. 3:14). Jesus answers enigmatically that he should receive baptism because “it is proper in this way to fulfill all righteousness” (Matt. 3:15).[35]

Differently, Ignatius of Antioch cites Jesus’s explanation that he sought baptism “so that all righteousness might be fulfilled” and adds a new idea: that Jesus submitted to baptism in order to cleanse the water. “The NT letters do not comment much on the events of Christ's life. The early church fathers began commenting on specific events such as the birth and the baptism. For an exception see 2 Pet 1:17,18 where Peter mentions the Transfiguration. Later fathers will interpret Jesus's baptism in the Jordan as an act of cleansing all waters for the baptism of sinners. This draws on Paul's doctrine of baptism as union with the passion of Christ in Rom 6:1ff.” [36]

Irenaeus similarly argues that the Spirit descended upon Jesus at his baptism and, against the gnostics, not on some other divine being or the so-called superior savior. Thus, like Justin, Irenaeus sees this event not as the inception of Jesus’s messianic identity but as the inauguration of his public ministry. The Spirit’s descent upon the Son in his human incarnation declared his identity. Jesus’s baptism further signalled his willingness to be fully human and his desire to renew humanity through his becoming one with it.[37] He says, “For they maintain that the baptism of the visible Jesus was unto remission of sins; but the redemption of Christ who de-scended upon Jesus was unto perfection, since they suppose that the former was ensouled but the latter spiritual. And the baptism of John was preached for repentance, but the redemption of Christ [who de-scended on him] was given for perfection. “[38]

Cyril of Jerusalem says, “Jesus sanctified baptism when He Himself was baptized. If the Son of God was baptized, can anyone who scorns baptism pretend to piety? Not that He was baptized to receive the remission of sins—for He was without sin—but being sinless, He was nevertheless baptized, that He might impart grace and dignity to those who receive the sacrament. For, "since the children share in flesh and blood, so he in like manner has shared in these,"38 that we, sharing His incarnate life, might also share His divine grace. So Jesus was baptized that we, in turn, herein also made partakers with Him, might receive not only salvation, but also the dignity. The dragon, according to Job, was in the water, he who received the Jordan in his maw.39 When, therefore, it was necessary to crush the heads of the dragon,40 descending into the water, He bound the strong one, that we might receive the "power to tread upon serpents and scorpions."41 It was no ordinary beast, but a horrible monster. No fishing ship could last under a single scale of his tail; before him stalked Destruction, ravaging all in her path.42 But Life came running up, that the maw of Death might be stopped and all we who were saved might say: "0 death, where is thy sting? O grave, where is thy victory?" Baptism draws death's sting.[39]

The question of why Jesus was baptized was central to the early fifth century controversies surrounding the person and work of Jesus as Savior. Theodore of Mopsuestia asserts that Jesus received John’s baptism not as a sign of repentance (he did not need it since he was free of sin) but rather in anticipation of “our baptism,” which confers the Spirit, establishes righteousness, and leads to the transformation of the human state.]]

    III.             𝐁𝐚𝐩𝐭𝐢𝐬𝐦 𝐢𝐧 𝐄𝐚𝐫𝐥𝐲 𝐂𝐡𝐫𝐢𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐚𝐧 𝐖𝐫𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐧𝐠𝐬

 1.       Baptism in the Didache (70–110 AD)

The word didache means “teaching.” It is actually a short form of the full Greek title, which is translated, The Teaching of the Twelve Apostles. Although the authorship of this document is unknown, the Didache gained widespread acceptance in the early Church. It claims to be directly from the apostles, but was almost certainly not written by an apostle. Since we do not know who wrote it, we cannot be sure when it was written, although it may have been written as early as the second half of the first century; thus it is possible that some of the content does go back to apostolic teaching. It may be contemporaneous with the Gospel of Matthew and may have formed a companion volume to the gospel(s).

The Didache instructs baptism in "living water" (flowing) and preferably by immersion. It emphasizes pre-baptismal fasting and the Trinitarian formula.

The Didache, also known as The Teaching of the Twelve Apostles, is one of the earliest Christian texts outside the New Testament, likely written between 70–110 CE. It includes one of the earliest descriptions of baptismal practice in the Christian tradition

The date of this work and its place of origin have been the subject of controversy in the past, and in spite of its primitive appearance it has been argued that it may be as late as the fourth century. Today there is a growing consensus of opinion that it comes to us from Syria and that its date is CE 100, and possibly earlier.[40]

Concerning baptism, baptize in this way. After you have spoken all these things, “baptize in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit,” in running water. If you do not have running water, baptize in other water. If you are not able in cold, then in warm. If you do not have either, pour out water three times on the head “in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.” Before the baptism the one baptizing and the one being baptized are to fast, and any others who are able. Command the one being baptized to fast beforehand a day or two.[41]

1.       As for baptism, baptize in this way: Having said all this beforehand, baptize in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, in running water.

2.       If you [sg. through vv. 2-4] do not have running water, however, baptize in another kind of water; if you cannot [do so] in cold [water], then [do so] in warm [water].

3.       But if you have neither, pour water on the head thrice in the name of Father and Son and Holy Spirit.

4.       Before the baptism, let the person baptizing Analysis and the person being baptized-and others who are able-fast; tell the one being baptized to fast one or two [days] before.[42]

Beginning with Did. 7.1 we enter a completely different realm. The Didachist had planned to follow his quotation of the Two Ways teaching with a section on the rites commonly used in his communities. The moral catechism is thus succeeded by an "agenda." In it the Didachist apparently makes use of liturgical traditions and probably had a fixed, written set of instructions as his source. To the old tradition (i.e., the source) he adds passages from his own pen. The old "agenda" the Didachist copied contained two ritual actions, baptism (βάπτισμα) and Eucharist (ευχαριστία); cf. 1 Corinthians 10-11. (We cannot say whether the communities of the Didache were acquainted with other ritual actions.) The exposition in the text first regulates the ritual for baptism, with citation of the ιερός λόγος or "sacred formula" (Did. 7.1 b). In connection with the directions for baptizing, we encounter the key word "fasting" (i.e., the text speaks of baptismal fasting before the action of baptism in 7.4).[43]

2.       The First Apology of Justin Martyr (AD 160)

Justin describes baptism as the "washing of regeneration," administered to those who believe in the truth of Christian teachings, and likens it to a spiritual rebirth.

This defence of the Christian faith was made by St Justin in Rome in about A.D 160. and is addressed to the Emperor Antoninus Pius. It includes the following accounts of baptism. They are tantalizingly vague, but more exact accounts were not necessary to Justin's purpose. This may explain why they include no mention of confirmation.[44]

I shall now lay before you the manner in which we dedicated ourselves to God when we were made new through Christ: for should I omit this, I might seem to err in this account. As many as are persuaded and believe that these things which we teach and. Describe are true, and undertake to live accordingly , are taught to pray and ask God, while fating, for the forgiveness of their sins: and we pray and fast with them. Then they are led by us to a place where there is  water, and they are reborn after the manner of rebirth by which we  also were reborn: for they are then washed [or, wash themselves} in the water.in the Name of the Father and Lord God of all things, and of our Savior Jesus Christ, and of the Holy Spirit ...

. . . over him that now choose to be reborn and repents of his sins is named the Father and Lord God of all things. This Name only is called upon by him that leads to the washing him that is to be washed: for no one can speak the Name of God, who is ineffable, and anyone who might boldly claim to do so is quite mad. This washing is called enlightened, because those that are experiencing these things have their minds enlightened. And he that is. being enlightened is washed [or, washes himself} in the Name of Jesus Christ who was crucified under Pontius Pilate, and in the Name of the Holy Spirit, which through the prophets foretold all things concerning Jesus.

65. After we have thus washed him that is persuaded and declares his assent, we lead him to those who are called brethren, where they are assembled, and make common prayer fervently for ourselves, for him that has been enlightened, and for all men everywhere, that, embracing the truth, we may be found in our lives good and obedient citizens, and also attain to everlasting salvation.[45]

3.       Baptism in the Second Century

By the second century, baptism involved instruction (catechesis), renouncing Satan, confession of faith, and full immersion, solidifying its status as entry into the Christian life

BARNABAS:

Let us inquire if the Lord was careful to make a revelation in advance concerning the water and the cross. Concerning the water, it was written with regard to Israel how they will not receive the baptism which brings forgiveness of sins but will supply another for themselves. . …Blessed are those who placed their hope in his cross and descended into the water… We descend into the water full of sins and uncleanness, and we ascend bearing reverence in our heart and having hope in Jesus in our spirit.

HERMAS, SHEPHERD:

The tower which you see being built is myself, the church…Hear, then, why the tower has been built on the waters. Your life was saved and will be saved through water. The tower has been founded by the pronouncement of his almighty and glorious Name, and it is supported by the invisible power of the Master.

4.       Canons of Hippolytus (Good Works Before Baptism) – AD 215

Hippolytus emphasized moral examination and repentance before baptism. Candidates had to demonstrate good works and ethical living prior to their baptism.

The Apostolic Tradition was written in Greek by Hippolytus in Rome, c AD 215. No text of the original survives. However, it is widely believed that this is the work which underlies a number of documents from Syria and Egypt. It has been commonly assumed that the Apostolic Tradition reflects the Roman liturgical tradition, possibly varied by the imagination or the prejudices of Hippolytus himself. However, the possibility cannot now be excluded that if any liturgical tradition is reflected in the work it is not necessarily that of Rome.[46]

The catechumen, when he is baptized, and he who presents him attests that he has been zealous for the commandments during the time of his catechumenate, that he has visited the sick or given to the needy, that he has kept himself from every wicked and disgraceful word, that he has hated vainglory, despised pride, and chosen for himself humility, and he confesses to the bishop that he [takes] responsibility for himself, so that the bishop is satisfied about him and considers him [worthy] of the mysteries, and that he has become truly pure, then he reads over him the gospel at that time, and asks him several times, “Are you in two minds, or under pressure from anything, or driven by convention? For nobody mocks the kingdom of heaven, but it is given to those who love it with all their heart.”[47]

5.       Cyril of Jerusalem on Baptism: Spiritual Cleansing and Adoption through the Holy Spirit

Cyril taught that baptism cleansed all past sins, granted adoption into God’s family, and infused the Holy Spirit, deeply rooting believers in the new covenant

Cyril presents a list of what is achieved by the immersion using examples drawn from throughout the bible. He emphasizes the physical act of washing as consistent with Christ's command (Cat. 3.4; John 3:3) and as imitation of His own baptism (Cat. 3.11). This washing cleanse the candidate from sin (Cat. 3.4; 12), like the washings recorded in the Old Testament (Cat. 3.5) and as John's baptism (Cat. 3.6). Cyril hints strongly in this lecture that by the immersion the candidates receive the gift of the Holy Spirit: they are urged, 'Therefore, when you are about to descend into the water, do not consider the basic water but receive salvation by the power of the Holy Spirit .. .' (Cat. 3.4); they are told that the water conveys 'spiritual grace' and that in the immersion the Holy Spirit seals the soul (Cat. 3.5). It is in drawing direct parallels between Christ's baptism by John and that which they will receive, that Cyril gives his clearest indication that the Holy Spirit is received in the immersion: and the Holy Spirit comes down upon you, and a fatherly voice comes over you: not 'This is my Son', but 'This has now become my son'. For upon that one 'is', ... since he is always 'Son of God'; but upon you, 'has now become', since you do not have it by nature but receive sonship by adoption. He ‘is' eternally, but you receive grace by dispensation. (Cat. 3.14)[48]

6.       Developments in Baptism (300–400 AD)

During this period, baptism became increasingly formalized, with greater emphasis on catechumenate periods, elaborate rites, and the sacramental theology of baptism.

From the 380s there are five Mystagogical Catecheses, delivered in Easter week to the newly baptized in which the liturgy and theology of baptism and the eucharist are explained. The unbaptized were forbidden to attend these services and instruction was therefore reserved until they had experienced them for the first time. Probably also from the 380s is the Procatechesis, a sermon delivered on the first day of Lent to those who had just enrolled as candidates for baptism. There is some debate about the authorship of the Mystagogical Catecheses, and they may well owe their final form to Cyril's successor, John, but none of the arguments seems conclusive.[49]

Cyril's main work, the Catechetical Lectures, is the only complete set of pre-baptismal instructions that we have from the period of the early church. They are of invaluable importance for reconstructing what was learned by candidates for baptism and their preparation for the liturgical rite of baptism. But they are also of significance for Cyril's theological and Christological views, and his scriptural exegesis.[50] We know full well that baptism not only washes away our sins and procures for us the gift of the Holy Spirit, but it is also a representation of the passion of Christ. That is why Paul proclaimed: Do you not know that all we who have been baptized into Christ Jesus have been baptized into his death? For through baptism we were buried along with him. . . . For in the case of Christ, death was real, his soul really being separated from his body. His burial, too, was real, for his sacred body was wrapped in clean linen. In his case, it all really happened. In our case, however, there was only a likeness of death and suffering, whereas concerning salvation there was not a likeness but the reality.[51]

from Cyril's Mystagogical Catecheses it may be inferred that the baptistery had several adjoining rooms for the use of catechumens to undress, to be anointed and – after their baptism - to be clothed in white garments.[52]

In 354 or 355, Jerusalem and the neighboring country suffered from famine as a consequence of which the poor appealed to Cyril for food. Since he had no money to purchase the necessary provisions, he sold a valuable robe, given by Constantine to Macarius to be worn when he performed the rite of sacred baptism - and other sacred ornaments of the church.[53]

The introductory Hocafechesis explains what the candidates can expect and what is expected of them, They have, for example, to be sincere, to be present at eve!)' lecture, to study what they are told to study, and, because of the discip!illa arcaIli, they are not to tell outsiders what they have heard - all this in order to accomplish the death of sin and a new spiritual birth through baptism.[54]

They were meant to teach those preparing for baptism the moral conduct expected of them, as well as giving them an understanding of the Bible and Christian doctrine. An important concept of these instructions was the unity of the Old and New Testaments and - clearly exemplified in Cyril's Catecheses - that the coming of Jesus fulfilled the Old Testament prophecies and that He was the Messiah[55]

The baptizands were in the nude, the bishop probably wore a special baptismal robe The neophytes then left the baptistery to a room where they were clothed in white garments and anointed with an aromatic oil called Myron or chrisms. or chrism. The myron is applied to the foreheads, ears, nostrils, and chest of the newly baptized. By the anointing with myron the neophytes receive the Holy Spirit.[56]

For those who went through this rite, old traditional patterns were overturned, another lifestyle was adopted, and old friends were replaced by new ones. Baptism was a new birth, and a start of a new life within a new community.[57]

Most of them, if not all, were adults, since infant baptism had become uncommon, and it is likely that their provenance intellectually, geographically, as well as religiously, varied considerably. Cyril admonishes his listeners from time to time to read the Scriptures, implying that some of them were educated, or at least could read.[58]

7.       Baptism Taken in Nudity (3rd to 4th Century)

Early Christians practiced baptism by full immersion, often nude, symbolizing the stripping off of the old sinful nature and the putting on of Christ.

Baptismal iconography in catacomb painting dates primarily from the 3rd to 4th centuries CE, during the early Christian period of the Roman Empire. Location: Found mainly in Roman catacombs, such as those of St. Callixtus, St. Domitilla, and St. Priscilla.

Baptism scenes in catacomb painting generally include certain distinguishing details: a small nude youth or child standing in or under a stream of water, a larger, clothed male with his right hand on the youth’s head, and a dove hovering above both figures[59]

    IV.            𝐔𝐧𝐝𝐞𝐫𝐬𝐭𝐚𝐧𝐝𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐁𝐚𝐩𝐭𝐢𝐬𝐦

Baptism is one of the most central rites of Christianity, practiced in almost every denomination. This introduction sets the stage for a theological, historical, and practical exploration of baptism. From the banks of the Jordan River where John the Baptist preached repentance, to the ritual fonts of contemporary churches, baptism marks a believer’s public identification with Christ and His Church. Yet, behind this simple act of immersion or sprinkling lies a rich tapestry of theological meaning, historical development, and diverse practice.

Understanding baptism requires exploring its biblical foundations, theological significance, historical practices, and the controversies that have surrounded it over the centuries. Why must believers undergo baptism? What does it symbolize in relation to sin, salvation, and the Christian life? How did early Jewish purification rituals and community baptisms at Qumran influence early Christian practices? Furthermore, how has baptism evolved from the time of the apostles to the elaborate rites of the fourth century?

This study seeks to examine baptism from a biblical, theological, and historical perspective. We will address the meaning and importance of believer’s baptism, the debates surrounding infant baptism, the historical development of baptismal practices, and baptism’s enduring role in the Christian faith today. Throughout this journey, we aim to anchor our understanding firmly in Scripture while appreciating the historical contexts that have shaped Christian baptism into what it is today.

By investigating these areas carefully, the believer can better appreciate baptism not merely as a ritual act, but as a profound expression of faith, obedience, and union with Christ. True baptism goes beyond water and ceremony; it speaks to the heart of Christian identity — dead to sin, alive to God, and committed to walking in newness of life.

Few subjects within the Christian faith have provoked as much enduring controversy as baptism. Fundamental disagreements persist: Who are the rightful recipients of baptism professing believers alone or also their infants? By what mode should baptism be administered—immersion, affusion, or aspersion? What is the primary meaning of baptism—a divine claim upon the individual or the believer’s public confession of faith? What efficacy does baptism possess—none, partial, or total? And if it accomplishes something, is its effect transient or everlasting?

All Christians are united in their use of water in baptism and in the invocation of the Triune Name. Beyond these essentials, however, there is little uniformity. It is a tragic irony that the sacrament instituted as a sign and seal of the church’s unity has become a frequent occasion for division. The Apostle reminds us that there is "one body and one Spirit—just as you were called to the one hope that belongs to your call—one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all" (Eph. 4:4–6). Yet, much like the Corinthians, we fracture Christ’s body, aligning ourselves as though baptized into the names of Thomas, Calvin, Luther, or John Piper (1 Cor. 1:10–18). Paul's piercing rebuke continues to echo through the centuries: "Is Christ divided?"

1.       Meaning

Baptism, from the Greek baptizo ("to immerse"), symbolizes cleansing, renewal, and initiation into the Christian faith. It represents both outward testimony and inward transformation The word 'Baptize' was not a previously existing native English word that was chosen to translate the Greek word because it would convey in English the meaning of the Greek word. It is simply a transliteration and Anglicization of the Greek word βαπτίζω. The question, therefore, arises as to what this Greek word means in English: what, if any, English word or words could be substituted for 'baptize' to express the same meaning?[60] It is well-known that βαπτίζω is an intensive form of βάπτω with the meaning 'dip, immerse or plunge'.[61] In Hebrew the verb for baptism is ‘tabal’, in Syriac 'amad”, and in Greek ‘baptizein’[62]

2.       What is Baptism

Baptism is a public declaration of faith in Jesus Christ. It signifies repentance, the washing away of sins, and rebirth into new life through the power of the Holy Spirit.

Baptism is one of the two ordinances or sacraments of the church, which we perform in obedience to the command of our Lord Jesus Christ. To be baptized is to be immersed in water by a minister of a Christian church in a public worship service on the basis of your personal and verbal confession of faith in Jesus Christ.[63]

Baptism is the sign of new life through Jesus Christ. It unites the one baptized with Christ and with his people. The New Testament scriptures and the liturgy of the Church unfold the meaning of baptism in various images which express the riches of Christ and the gifts of his salvation. These images are sometimes linked with the symbolic uses of water in the Old Testament. Baptism is participation in Christ’s death and resurrection (Rom. 6:3–5; Col. 2:12); a washing away of sin (I Cor. 6:11); a new birth (John3:5); an enlightenment by Christ (Eph. 5:14); a re- clothing in Christ (Gal. 3:27); a renewal by the Spirit(Titus 3:5); the experience of salvation from the flood(I Peter 3:20–21); an exodus from bondage (I Cor. 10:1–2) and a liberation into a new humanity in which barriers of division whether of sex or race or social status are transcended (Gal. 3:27-28; I Cor. 12:13).[64]

Since its principal use in secular Greek was in the secondary sense “to dye” (from the practice of dipping an object in its colouring agent [cf. Rev 19:13, where Jesus’ robe is “dipped” in blood]), the intensive form baptizō came into general use. Two of its common uses were to describe the drowning of a person and the sinking of a ship. There is no indication that the NT departs from the meaning “to dip, plunge” (Mk 1:5, 9; Mt 3:6, 16; cf. Acts 8:38).[65]

Baptism is a church’s act of affirming and portraying a believer’s union with Christ by immersing him or her in water, and a believer’s act of publicly committing him or herself to Christ and his people, thereby uniting a believer to the church and marking off him or her from the world.[66]

The critical point is that Christians were baptized into Christ Jesus. Paul uses the preposition “into” to speak of incorporation into Christ. Baptism unites believers with Christ and inserts them into the ecclesial body of Christ, the Church (1 Cor 12:13).[67]

3.       Baptism as a Sacrament

As a sacrament, baptism is an outward, visible sign of an inward, invisible grace. In many traditions, it is considered a means through which God imparts spiritual blessing.

Baptism is a sacrament, a term that many people today find unhelpful. A sacrament has been defined as a 'sacred act in which a person is bound by oath.' The original sacramentum was a Roman soldier's oath of enlistment. In the sacrament of baptism, the candidate makes a declaration of loyalty binding him or her to Christ, and states an intention to shape his or her life in unity with Christ. But 'sacrament' means something else too. It is an English translation of the Greek musterion and the Latin mysterium, which are also rendered as 'mystery', signifying the believer's initiation into the mystery of life, and into the mystery of the death and Resurrection of Jesus Christ.[68]

A sacrament is an outward and visible sign of an inward, spiritual reality. In baptism, the outward sign is water (Acts 2:38) and the spiritual reality is the new birth or being “born again,” as our Lord explained to Nicodemus (John 3:3 5). Thus, water baptism is a visible and outward sign of an inward and spiritual reality. When the Holy Spirit regenerates us, we repent and believe and water baptism follows as a testimony to this spiritual reality (Acts 10:47).[69]

4.       Why is Baptism Important

Baptism is commanded by Christ (Matthew 28:19-20) and serves as an essential act of obedience and identification with the Christian community and the kingdom of God

Baptism is important precisely because it is tied to the gospel, to the saving work that Christ accomplished in his death and resurrection. In Scripture, baptism is regularly linked with admission into the people of God—the church of Jesus Christ.[70]

Scripture is clear that through faith our sins are forgiven, we are counted righteous by God, and we are reconciled to God (Rom. 3:21–31; 4:1–8; 5:1–11). Baptism depicts all these realities, but it does not create them. All believers are commanded to be baptised, and obeying Christ’s commands is how we demonstrate that our faith is real (John 14:21–24; James 2:14–26; 1 John 2:3–6). So, no Christian should opt out of baptism on the grounds that it is not “necessary for salvation.” If you claim to be saved, baptism is necessary proof. Yet baptism itself does not guarantee salvation.[71]

5.       Why Believer's Baptism is Important

Believer’s baptism emphasizes personal faith and repentance. It reflects the biblical pattern where faith precedes baptism, preserving the authenticity of Christian commitment. Believer’s baptism emphasizes personal faith and repentance. It reflects the biblical pattern where faith precedes baptism, preserving the authenticity of Christian commitment.

Believer's baptism accords with the gospel because it teaches that the objective work of God in salvation necessarily leads to the subjective response of faith. God's work in Christ is not suspended on nothing, with no answering response of faith.[72]

Baptism is a sign of the gospel’s application. It is a sign that this person has turned from sin and has been united to Christ by faith. But baptism does not just affirm these realities; it also portrays them. Think of Christ dying, being buried, and rising again. Baptism publicly pictures someone’s union with this death, burial, and resurrection. A person is physically plunged under water and raised out of it.[73]

We believe that baptism should be reserved for believers because it preserves the testimony of the gospel by showing that only those who have repented and believed belong to the church. Only those who have exercised faith are justified. Hence, only those who have trusted in Christ should be baptized. Restricting baptism to believers only, therefore, preserves the pure witness of the gospel. In addition, believer's baptism also demonstrates that the church is a new covenant community—all those within it know the Lord (Heb 8:11). The church of Jesus Christ is not a mixed community of believers and unbelievers. It consists of those who have confessed Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord[74]

6.       It is Identification with Christ

In baptism, believers are symbolically united with Christ in His death, burial, and resurrection (Romans 6:3-4), sharing in His victory over sin and death.

Water baptism depicts the baptism of the Holy Spirit, which identifies the believer with Jesus Christ. At the initial moment of faith, the believer is spiritually baptized into Christ. Paul explains that this union with Christ has grand implications. “Or do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus have been baptized into His death? Therefore, we have been buried with Him through baptism into death, in order that as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, so we too might walk in newness of life” (Rom. 6:3–4). From the moment of regeneration, the old sinful nature is no longer the supreme power in life. Christians have spiritually died with Christ, have been buried with Christ, and have risen to a new sphere of life with Christ. From now on they are to live in the power of Christ for the glory of God. Water baptism portrays all of this. The great spiritual transformation described here can only refer to the work that the Holy Spirit does when a person believes in Christ. Water baptism itself cannot do this. Water baptism illustrates identification with Jesus Christ, but the Spirit’s baptism is what accomplishes it. Baptism by immersion, rather than by sprinkling, accurately depicts this inner spiritual transformation. Descending into the water indicates the believer’s death with Christ to the old way of life. Being covered over with water symbolizes burial with Him. Ascending from the water proclaims that the new Christian’s life will never be the same. Paul says that “our old self was crucified with Him, that our body of sin might be done away with, that we should no longer be slaves to sin; for he who has died is freed from sin” (Rom. 6:6 7).[75]

7.       What It Means to Be Dead to Sin in Baptism

Baptism illustrates the believer’s death to sin and old life and resurrection to newness of life in Christ, highlighting sanctification as a lifelong process.

Being dead to sin means not obeying it any more. Baptism has made us dead to sin once and for all, but we must strive to maintain this state of affairs, so that, however many commands sin may give us, we no longer obey it but remain unmoved by it, as a corpse does. Elsewhere, Paul even says that sin itself is dead… in order to show that virtue is easy. But here, since he is trying to rouse his hearers to action, he says that they are the ones who are dead.[76] Cranfield nicely lays out the options. (1) We died to sin in God’s sight, that is, in a forensic or juridical sense. (2) We died to sin in a sacramental sense, in that we died with Christ and were raised with him in baptism. (3) We die to sin in a moral sense, in that we mortify sin in our bodies. Or (4) we die to sin when we actually die physically.[77] 

But Thomas R. Schreiner raises concerns over the points of Cranfield and rejects view no 4, for it makes nonsense of the claim that we have died to sin in dying with Christ. Nowhere does the text say that death to sin becomes a reality when we die physically; it becomes a reality upon dying with Christ in baptism. Nor is view 3 satisfactory. In the text Paul gives exhortations to throttle the dominion of sin (vv. 11–14). But the call to resist sin is based on what has already become a reality for believers through participating together with Christ in his death. To say that the death to sin described in verse 2 is a moral death is to tear the indicative out of Paul’s gospel and replace it with the imperative, which is a distortion of his theology. When Paul says we have died to sin, he is not exhorting believers to cease from sin (a command in the imperative mood); he is proclaiming to them the good news that they have died to sin (a statement of fact in the indicative mood).[78]

8.       Is Joining a Church Through Baptism a Must?

While baptism often precedes formal church membership, it is fundamentally about joining Christ, not merely an institution. However, baptism typically marks entry into visible Christian fellowship.

Since baptism is a sign of being part of the universal church, it should be closely linked to being part of the visible, local church as well. There should be no such thing as a person being baptized and not becoming a member of a local church at the same time. In fact, we should not baptize a person who requested baptism but was not willing to join the church at the same time, because not to join a local church is to deny part of the meaning of baptism. Paul writes: 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   one body— Jews or Greeks, slaves or free—and all were made to drink of one Spirit (1 Corinthians 12:12–13).[79]

      V.            𝐂𝐡𝐚𝐥𝐥𝐞𝐧𝐠𝐞𝐬 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐌𝐢𝐬𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐜𝐞𝐩𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐬

 1.       Why Infant Baptism is Un-Biblical

Infant baptism, while historically widespread, lacks direct biblical support. Scripture consistently links baptism to conscious repentance and faith, prerequisites infants cannot fulfill.

Being dead to sin means not obeying it any more. Baptism has made us dead to sin once and for all, but we must strive to maintain this state of affairs, so that, however many commands sin may give us, we no longer obey it but remain unmoved by it, as a corpse does. Elsewhere, Paul even says that sin itself is dead… in order to show that virtue is easy. But here, since he is trying to rouse his hearers to action, he says that they are the ones who are dead.[80] Cranfield nicely lays out the options. (1) We died to sin in God’s sight, that is, in a forensic or juridical sense. (2) We died to sin in a sacramental sense, in that we died with Christ and were raised with him in baptism. (3) We die to sin in a moral sense, in that we mortify sin in our bodies. Or (4) we die to sin when we actually die physically.[81] 

But Thomas R. Schreiner raises concerns over the points of Cranfield and rejects view no 4, for it makes nonsense of the claim that we have died to sin in dying with Christ. Nowhere does the text say that death to sin becomes a reality when we die physically; it becomes a reality upon dying with Christ in baptism. Nor is view 3 satisfactory. In the text Paul gives exhortations to throttle the dominion of sin (vv. 11–14). But the call to resist sin is based on what has already become a reality for believers through participating together with Christ in his death. To say that the death to sin described in verse 2 is a moral death is to tear the indicative out of Paul’s gospel and replace it with the imperative, which is a distortion of his theology. When Paul says we have died to sin, he is not exhorting believers to cease from sin (a command in the imperative mood); he is proclaiming to them the good news that they have died to sin (a statement of fact in the indicative mood).[82]

2.       Sources of Infant Baptism

Infant baptism arose from theological ideas about original sin, covenant theology, and the desire to assure salvation from early childhood, though its scriptural basis is debated.

a.       IRENAEUS: For he came to save all by means of himself-all, I say, who by him are born again to God-infants, children, adolescents, young people, and old people. [83]

b.      Tertullian on Delayed Baptism: Advocating Maturity and Personal Faith Before Initiation  213 AD

Tertullian was a member of the Church in North Africa. Converted to the faith in about'195, he defected to the Montanist sect in about 213[84].

TERTULLIAN: According to the circumstances and nature, and also age, of each person, the delay of baptism is more suitable, especially in the case of small children. What is the necessity, if there is no such necessity, for the sponsors as well to be brought into danger, since they may fail to keep their promises by reason of death or be deceived by an evil disposition which grows up in the child? The Lord indeed says, "Do not forbid them to come to me." Let them "come" then while they are growing up, while they are learning, while they are instructed why they are coming. Let them become Christians when they are able to know Christ. In what respect does the innocent period of life hasten to the V. remission of sins? Should we act more cautiously in worldly matters, so that divine things are given to those to whom earthly property is not given? Let them learn to ask for salvation so that you may be seen to have given "to him who asks." [85]

The church’s transition to the postponement of baptism stands in marked contrast to apostolic example (e.g., Acts 2:41; 8:34-39; 9:18; 10:48; 16:33), but is detailed in postapostolic teaching.

Certainly Origen (ca. 185-ca. 254) believed that the church had received the tradition of infant baptism from the apostles.[86]

 c.       Origen on Infant Baptism: Apostolic Tradition and Cleansing from Inherited Sin

ORIGEN: I take this occasion to discuss something which our brothers 14 often inquire about. Infants are baptized for the remission of sins. Of what kinds? Or when did they sin? But since "No one is exempt from stain," one removes the stain by the mystery of baptism. For this reason infants also are baptized. For "Unless one is born of water and the Spirit he cannot enter the kingdom of heaven." (Homily on Luke 14.5) [After quoting Psalm 51:5 and Job 14:4] These verses may be adduced 15 when it is asked why, since the baptism of the church is given for the remission of sins, baptism according to the practice of the church is given even to infants; since indeed if there is in infants nothing which ought to pertain to forgiveness and mercy, the grace of baptism would be superfluous. (Homily on Leviticus 8.3) [After quoting Leviticus 12:8 and Psalm 51:5] For this also the church 16 had a tradition from the apostles, to give baptism even to infants. For they to whom the secrets of the divine mysteries were given knew that there is in all persons the natural stains of sin which must be washed away by the water and the Spirit. On account of these stains the body itself is called the body of sin. [87]

3.       The Infant Baptismal Liturgy in the Eastern Orthodox Church

The Orthodox Church practices a full baptismal liturgy for infants, including immersion, chrismation (anointing with oil), and communion, viewing baptism as a covenantal entrance into the faith community.

In the Orthodox churches the sacrament of baptism is as a rule administered to infants “The Office of Holy Baptism begins with the reception of the candidate as a catechumen. The priest removes the person’s clothes except for one garment. He places him with his face towards the east, breathes three times in his face, makes the sign of the cross upon him three times, lays his hand upon his head and prays for him. He says the three exorcisms, ordering the Devil to leave this person: “The Lord layeth thee under ban, O Devil: He who came into the world and made his abode among men... Begone, and depart from this creature, with all thy powers and thy angels.” After further prayers for delivery from evil the priest breathes upon his mouth, his brow and his breast, saying, “Expel from him every evil and impure spirit, which hideth and maketh its lair in his heart. The spirit of error, the spirit of guile, the spirit of idolatry and of every concupiscence; the spirit of deceit and of every uncleanliness... And make him a reason-endowed sheep in the holy flock of thy Christ...”

Then follows the renunciation of the Devil. The priest turns the person to the west and asks three times, “Dost thou renounce Satan, and all his Angels, and all his works, and all his service, and all his pride?” And each time the catechumen answers, “I do.” If the person to be baptized comes from a different tradition, or is an infant, his godparent (“sponsor”) answers in his place. The priest questions him three times, “Hast thou renounced Satan?” And the catechumen, or his sponsor, responds each time, “I have.” He is then requested to spit upon Satan, and the priest turns him again to the east, asking him three times, “Dost thou unite thyself unto Christ?”, and then, also three times, “Hast thou united thyself unto Christ?” When the catechumen has answered these questions, he recites the Nicene Creed, the Holy Symbol of the Faith. This is also said three times, whereupon the question, “Hast thou united thyself unto Christ?” is repeated three times again. When the catechumen has affirmed, for the third time, “I have,” the priest orders him, “Bow down also before Him!”, and he answers, “I bow down before the Father, and the Son and the Holy Spirit, the Trinity, one in Essence and undivided.” A short prayer of intercession concludes this part of the liturgy. “[88]

4.       Is Baptism the Reformed Form of Old Testament Circumcision?

Some Reformed theologians argue baptism replaced circumcision as the covenant sign, thus applying it to infants; however, circumcision was a national/ethnic mark, while baptism is based on personal faith

L486} 11 Ignatius uses the language of circumcision from the OT to declare that it is the Christian who is truly circumcised. His usage has precedents in Col 2:12,13 where Paul suggests that baptism is equivalent to the circumcision of the old covenant.[89]

5.       Examining the Candidate Before Baptism

In the early Church and New Testament, candidates for baptism were often examined for authentic faith and understanding, ensuring baptism was meaningful and not merely ritualistic.

There are texts from The Apostolic Tradition of Hippolytus concerning the candidates for baptism. [90]

1. Those who come forward for the first time to hear the word shall first be brought to the teachers at the house before all the people [of God] come in.

2. And let them be examined as to the reason why they have come forward to the faith. And those who bring them shall bear witness for them, whether they are able to hear.

3. Let their life and manner of living be enquired into, whether he is a slave or free.[91]

24.   And when they are chosen who are set apart to receive baptism let their life be examined, whether they lived piously while catachumens, whether they “honoured the widows”, whether they visited the sick, whether they have fulfilled every good work.[92]

 6.       Baptism’s Result Will Only Show in Later Life

Baptism's spiritual fruit — such as perseverance, growth in holiness, and love — manifests over time. Initial baptism without ongoing faith and transformation is hollow.

"Baptism was for Aquinas a spiritual regeneration and incorporation into Christ, but it was a hidden regeneration occurring in the soul of the baptized infant which manifested itself only later in life, and it was a metaphysical incorporation into' Christ which occurred through the reception of spiritual powers known collectively as the baptismal character."[93]

Cleansing in the Qumran Community In New Testament scholarship some fifty years ago, drawing parallels between the Qumran community and the Christian community of New Testament times was thought to be the quickest way to understand rightly certain principles and practices of the New Testament. The parallels between Qumran and Christian practices, however, in the matter of water rites have never been considered a major point of contact between the two groups. For one thing, the water lustrations of Qumran took place not simply once in a lifetime or even once in a day, but as many as three times a day if we are to believe Josephus.[94]

The Dead Sea Scrolls talk much about the community that lived at Qumran; how they worshipped, how they lived, their theological and eschatological views, and so much more.[95]

Jodi Magness divides the scrolls into three categories. The types of works represented at Qumran can be categorized or described in different ways, depending on one’s point of view. For example, Devorah Dimant has suggested dividing the scrolls into three groups: (1) biblical manuscripts, (2) works containing terminology linked with the Qumran Community, and (3) works not containing such terminology.[96]

At Qumran, cleansing by entry into ritual water seems to have been practiced before meals, and it is suggested that this procedure was quite different from the baptism performed by John the Baptist; therefore, John’s form of baptism had no connection to Qumran-Essene practices[97]

It is also evident from Josephus that there were other types of baptism, including purification by immersion in special water for an initiate who had completed his first year of probation. Should a senior member be touched by a less pure junior member, he would bathe to regain his cleanliness. There was also a baptism of repentance.[98]

Many scholars have noted the similarities between sectarian views of purification and those associated with John the Baptist, who was active in the vicinity of Qumran during the 1st century and might even have been a member of the community at some point (though this is a matter of controversy). However, in Christianity baptism became a one-time penitential purification, as opposed to the repeated immersions and other purification rites required in Judaism.[99]

7.       The Re-Baptism

Re-baptism occurs when individuals who were baptized under questionable circumstances (e.g., infant baptism or unbelieving baptism) seek a believer’s baptism upon true faith.

The later letters of Cyprian reveal more and more concern with various questions relating to baptism. In a letter to Magnus, Cyprian gives in detail his view that those baptised by Novatian[100], must be rebaptized when they come into the Church and that those who have received clinical baptism through sprinkling in infirmity and illness, when necessity compels, receive the pardon and grace of God[101]

In the controversy over baptism, many African bishops found themselves at variance with the Roman practice, which recognises as valid any baptism performed according to the correct formula with the correct intention. This means that Rome recognises the baptism of many of the heretics and merely imposes hands upon those who return to the fold. Cyprian's great respect for the Sacrament leads him into the error of associating the efficacy of the Sacrament with the worthiness of the minister. It is responsible for his theory that, since heretics have no power to baptize, baptism of those returning from heresy is not a second baptism but a first. From this point of view, Cyprian does not believe in rebaptism as such because he does not consider that there is any baptism outside the Church.[102]

Towards the end of Tertullian's life - and certainly after the time of his extant writings - a Council was held in Carthage under the leadership of the Carthaginian bishop Agrippinus[103]. The most hotly debated issue at this Council was apparently the re-baptism of heretics, which practice was approved.[104]

Cyril of Jerusalem believes, “A man cannot be baptized a second and a third time. Otherwise, he could say: "I failed once; the second time I shall succeed." Fail once, and there is no putting it right. For, "one Lord, one faith, one Baptism." It is only heretics who are rebaptized, and then because the first was no Baptism.”[105]

8.       Only Those Who Truly Possess the Holy Spirit Can Rightly Baptize

Some early Christian groups insisted that baptisms by heretics or unregenerate ministers were invalid, tying the sacrament’s efficacy to the spiritual state of the administrator.

For since in baptism his sins are forgiven for each one, the Lord proves and declares in His Gospel that sins can be forgiven through them alone who have the Holy Spirit. For, after the Resurrection, sending His disciples, He spoke to them and said:  "As the Father has sent me, I also send you. “When he had said this, he breathed upon them, and said to them, 'Receive the Holy Spirit; whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven him; and whose you shall retain, they are retained. “In this place, He shows that he alone who has the Holy Spirit can baptise and give the remission of sins. Finally, John, who was to baptise Christ our Lord Himself, previously had received the Holy Spirit when he was still in his mother's womb, so that it might be certain and manifest that only those who have the Holy Spirit can baptise. Therefore, let those who defend heretics or schismatics answer us whether they have the Holy Spirit or whether they have not. If they have, why are hands placed upon the ones baptised there when they come to us to receive the Spirit, since He would have already been received there if He could have been given?[106]

𝐕𝐈. 𝐁𝐚𝐩𝐭𝐢𝐬𝐦, 𝐎𝐛𝐞𝐝𝐢𝐞𝐧𝐜𝐞, 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐒𝐚𝐥𝐯𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧

1.       Disobeying Baptism: Baptism and Good Works as Evidences of Saving Faith

While baptism itself does not save, refusing baptism may reveal disobedience to Christ. Baptism and other good works are evidences of genuine faith, not the cause of salvation.

At this point, we need to see that there is a kind of parallel between baptism as a response of discipleship to the lordship of Christ and good works as evidence of having been born again. Some people mistakenly think that Paul and James contradict one another on the relationship between faith and works. Paul says that we are saved by faith alone (Ephesians 2:8–9); James says that faith without works is dead (James 2:17). Each is emphasizing one side of the truth. Saving faith always issues forth in the fruit of the Spirit, and therefore good works will characterize the life of every person who had been born again by faith in Christ. It is not that the works cause the faith, but that the faith causes the works. It is not faith in works, but rather, faith that works. It is similar with baptism. Being baptized will not save anyone, but anyone who really is saved will want to follow Jesus Christ in the first work of Christian discipleship. If someone refuses to obey Jesus at this point, we are justified in wondering whether that person really is born again. Baptism is a sign of the presence and working of the Holy Spirit.[107]

𝐂𝐨𝐧𝐜𝐥𝐮𝐬𝐢𝐨𝐧

Baptism stands as a visible sign of an invisible reality: the death of the old self and the resurrection into new life through Christ. As we have seen, baptism is not merely a tradition or outward formality, but a vital expression of saving faith, rooted in the direct command of Christ and the example of the early Church.

Throughout history, baptism has been a symbol of repentance, cleansing, spiritual rebirth, and incorporation into the body of Christ. Yet, misunderstandings and controversies — especially surrounding infant baptism, re-baptism, and the authority of those who baptize — have also highlighted the need for continual return to the clear teachings of Scripture.

Believer’s baptism, performed as a response to personal repentance and faith, most faithfully reflects the New Testament pattern. Infant baptism, though practiced widely across Christian history, finds little direct biblical support and risks obscuring the personal nature of faith and commitment that baptism is meant to proclaim.

Historically, the Jewish ritual washings, the practices of John the Baptist, the early Church Fathers, and subsequent theological developments all contribute layers of richness to our understanding of baptism. Practices like baptizing candidates nude in the early centuries emphasized the shedding of the old sinful nature and full vulnerability before God. Early catechumens underwent significant instruction before baptism, showing the importance placed on understanding and true conversion.

Ultimately, baptism is an act of obedience — not a work that earns salvation, but a testimony of it. Refusing baptism without valid cause may reveal a deeper disobedience to Christ’s lordship. On the other hand, rightly understood, baptism strengthens the believer’s faith, publicly unites him or her with the Church, and bears witness to the transforming power of the Holy Spirit.

As Christians today, we are called to uphold the biblical teaching and spirit of baptism — a living testimony that we have died with Christ and risen again to walk in newness of life, empowered by the Holy Spirit, awaiting the final consummation of our salvation.

The practice of the church is divided into an eastern and a western mode. Broadly speaking, the East baptizes by a trine immersion; the West by affusion. When we scrutinize the history of these differing practices, however, we quickly learn that, with whatever unessential variations in details, the usage of the East runs back into a high antiquity; while there are indications on the surface of the western usage that it is comparatively recent in origin, and survivals of an older custom persist side by side with it; so that there was a time when immersion was as universal in the West as in the East. There is a sense, then, in which we may say broadly that the present diversity in baptismal usage is a growth of time; and that, should we move back within the first millennium of the church's life, we should find the whole Christian world united in the ordinary use of trine immersion.[108]

 

 

---

[1]Bartlett, John R._Freyne, Sean V - Jews in the Hellenistic and Roman Cities-Taylor & Francis (CAM)_Routledge (2003)p212

[2]25Acts 10:45; Rom 2:26-27; 3:30; 15:8; Gal 2:7-9, 12; Eph 2:11; Phil 3:3; Col 3:11;4:11, etc

[3] -Oskar Skarsaune, Reidar Hvalvik - Jewish Believers in Jesus_ The Early Centuries-Hendrickson Publishers (2007)p 12

[4] Believers Baptism Sign of the New Covenant in Christ by Thomas R. Schreiner, Shawn Wright p39-40

[5] James H. Charlesworth (ed.) - John and Qumran  -Chapman (1972) p 4-5

[6] James H. Charlesworth (ed.) - John and Qumran  -Chapman (1972) p 1

[7] Ben Witherington III, Troubled Waters: The Real New Testament Theology of Baptism (Waco: Baylor University Press, 2007), 22. 

[8] (Studies in the Dead Sea Scrolls & Related Literature) Jodi Magness - The Archaeology of Qumran and the Dead Sea Scrolls-Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company (2002) p137

[9] Florentino Garcia Martinez, The Dead Sea Scrolls Translated: The Qumran Texts in English trans. Wilfred G.E. Watson (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans, 1996), 1QS V.7c-9a (Rule of the Community, 8) 

[10] Ancient_Baptism_Practices_and_Jesus_p10

[11] (Studies in the Dead Sea Scrolls & Related Literature) Jodi Magness - The Archaeology of Qumran and the Dead Sea Scrolls-Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company (2002) p137-138

[12] Ancient_Baptism_Practices_and_Jesus_p12

[13] (Sacra Pagina 7) Raymond F. Collins - First Corinthians-Liturgical Press (1999)p556

[14] (Swindolls living insights New Testament commentary Volume 7) Swindoll, Charles R - Insights on 1 & 2 Corinthians-Tyndale House Publishers, Inc. (2017) p317

[15] Cornelius R. Stam - Commentary on the first epistle of Paul to the Corinthians-Berean Bible Society (1988)p 203

[16] (New International Commentary on the New Testament) F. W. Grosheide - Commentary on the First Epistle to the Corinthians-Eerdmans (1960) p372

[17] (New International Commentary on the New Testament) F. W. Grosheide - Commentary on the First Epistle to the Corinthians-Eerdmans (1960) p 371

[18] Anthony R. Lusvardi, SJ - Baptism of Desire and Christian Salvation-Catholic University of America Press (2024)p 14

[19] (Abingdon New Testament Commentaries) Richard Horsley - Abingdon New Testament Commentary -1st Corinthians (Abingdon New Testament Commentaries)-Abingdon Press (1998)p207

[20] (New Cambridge Bible Commentary) Craig S. Keener - 1-2 Corinthians (New Cambridge Bible Commentary)-Cambridge University Press (2005)p128

[21] (Hermeneia_ a Critical and Historical Commentary on the Bible) Hans Conzelmann - First Corinthians_ A Commentary on the First Epistle to the Corinthians-Fortress Press (1988) p 276

[22] (Cornerstone Biblical Commentary Series) Baker, William_Comfort, Philip W._Martin, Ralph P._Toney, Carl N - 1 and 2 Corinthians-Tyndale House Publishers, Inc. (2009)p412

[23] (Cornerstone Biblical Commentary Series) Baker, William_Comfort, Philip W._Martin, Ralph P._Toney, Carl N - 1 and 2 Corinthians-Tyndale House Publishers, Inc. (2009)p415

[24] David K. Lowery, "1 Corinthians," in The Bible Knowledge Commentary, ed. John F. Walvoord and Roy B. Zuck (Wheaton, Ill.: Victor Books, 1983), 544.

[25] (MacArthur New Testament Commentary Series) MacArthur, John - First Corinthians_ the MacArthur New Testament Commentary-Moody Publishers (1984) p 584

[26] MacArthur New Testament Commentary Series) MacArthur, John - First Corinthians_ the MacArthur New Testament Commentary-Moody Publishers (1984) p 585

[27] Larry E. Dyer - Baptism – The Believers First Obedience-Kregel Publications,U.S. (2020)p47

[28] Robin M. Jensen - Baptismal Imagery in Early Christianity_ Ritual, Visual, and Theological Dimensions-Baker Publishing Group (2012)p 31

[29] Robin M. Jensen - Baptismal Imagery in Early Christianity_ Ritual, Visual, and Theological Dimensions-Baker Publishing Group (2012) p32

[30] Robin M. Jensen - Baptismal Imagery in Early Christianity_ Ritual, Visual, and Theological Dimensions-Baker Publishing Group (2012) p32

[31] Walter E. Bundy, The Journal of Religion , Jan., 1927, Vol. 7, No. 1 (Jan., 1927), pp. 57

[32] Baptism, the New Testament, and the church  historical and contemporary studies in honour of R.E.O. White by Porter, Stanley E. Cross, Anthony R. White, Reginald E. O p 99

[33] Believers Baptism Sign of the New Covenant in Christ by Thomas R. Schreiner, Shawn Wright p 41

[34] Walter E. Bundy, The Journal of Religion , Jan., 1927, Vol. 7, No. 1 (Jan., 1927), pp. 62

[35]  Robin M. Jensen - Baptismal Imagery in Early Christianity_ Ritual, Visual, and Theological Dimensions-Baker Publishing Group (2012) p34

[36] Kenneth J. Howell_ Ignatius of Antioch_ Polycarp - Ignatius of Antioch & Polycarp of Smyrna_ A New Translation and Theological Commentary (Early Christian Fathers Series) (2009) p 106

[37] Robin M. Jensen - Baptismal Imagery in Early Christianity_ Ritual, Visual, and Theological Dimensions-Baker Publishing Group (2012) p35

[38] (ACW 55) Irenaeus - Against the heresies. Vol. 1 _ Book 1 (1992) p 78

[39] (The Fathers of the Church_ A New Translation_ 61) Saint Cyril of Jerusalem - The Works of Saint Cyril of Jerusalem, Volume 1_ Procatechesis and Catecheses 1-12-The Catholic University of America Press p115

[40] Edward Charles Whitaker - Documents of the baptismal liturgy-S.P.C.K. (1970) p1

[41] E. Ferguson - Early Christians Speak_ Faith and Life in the First Three Centuries-Abilene University Press (1999)p19

[42] (Hermeneia_ A Critical & Historical Commentary on the Bible) Kurt Niederwimmer - The Didache-Fortress Press (1998) p 125

[43] (Hermeneia_ A Critical & Historical Commentary on the Bible) Kurt Niederwimmer - The Didache-Fortress Press (1998)p125

[44] Edward Charles Whitaker - Documents of the baptismal liturgy-S.P.C.K. (1970) p1

[45] Edward Charles Whitaker - Documents of the baptismal liturgy-S.P.C.K. (1970) p1-2

[46] Edward Charles Whitaker - Documents of the baptismal liturgy-S.P.C.K. (1970) p2-3

[47] (Hermeneia) Paul F. Bradshaw, Maxwell E. Johnson, Harold W. Attridge (editor), L. Edward Phillips (editor) - The Apostolic Tradition_ A Commentary-Fortress Press (2002)p 105

[48] (Liturgy, worship, and society) Juliette Day - The baptismal liturgy of Jerusalem_ fourth- and fifth-century evidence from Palestine, Syria and Egypt-Routledge (2016) p 56

[49] (Gorgias Liturgical Studies 42) Juliette Day - Baptism in Early Byzantine Palestine 325-451-Gorgias Press (2009) p11

[50] Jan Willem Drijvers - Cyril Of Jerusalem_ Bishop And City (Supplements to Vigiliae Christianae)-Brill Academic Publishers (2004) p xi

[51] Mystagogical Catechesis 2.6–7. Translation adapted from The Works of Saint Cyril of Jerusalem, vol. 2, trans. Leo P. McCauley, SJ, and Anthony A. Stephenson, FC 64 (Washington, DC: Catholic University of America Press, 1970), 165–67.

[52] Jan Willem Drijvers - Cyril Of Jerusalem_ Bishop And City (Supplements to Vigiliae Christianae)-Brill Academic Publishers (2004) p 18

[53] Jan Willem Drijvers - Cyril Of Jerusalem_ Bishop And City (Supplements to Vigiliae Christianae)-Brill Academic Publishers (2004) p 38

[54] Jan Willem Drijvers - Cyril Of Jerusalem_ Bishop And City (Supplements to Vigiliae Christianae)-Brill Academic Publishers (2004) p 55

[55] Jan Willem Drijvers - Cyril Of Jerusalem_ Bishop And City (Supplements to Vigiliae Christianae)-Brill Academic Publishers (2004) p 85

[56] Jan Willem Drijvers - Cyril Of Jerusalem_ Bishop And City (Supplements to Vigiliae Christianae)-Brill Academic Publishers (2004) p 94

[57] Jan Willem Drijvers - Cyril Of Jerusalem_ Bishop And City (Supplements to Vigiliae Christianae)-Brill Academic Publishers (2004) p 85

[58] Jan Willem Drijvers - Cyril Of Jerusalem_ Bishop And City (Supplements to Vigiliae Christianae)-Brill Academic Publishers (2004) p 112

[59] (Vigiliae Christianae, Supplements 105) Robin M. Jensen - Living Water_ Images, Symbols, and Settings of Early Christian Baptism (Supplements to Vigiliae Christianae_ Texts and Studies of Early Christ p5

[60] (Library of New Testament Studies) Stanley E. Porter & Anthony R. Cross - Dimensions of Baptism_ Biblical and Theological Studies-Bloomsbury Academic p8

[61] (Library of New Testament Studies) Stanley E. Porter & Anthony R. Cross - Dimensions of Baptism_ Biblical and Theological Studies-Bloomsbury Academic p8

[62] F. Gavin, Some Notes on Early Christian Baptism, Journal of the American Oriental Society , 1926, Vol. 46 (1926), pp. 15

[63] Craig A Carter - The faith once delivered_ An introduction to the basics of the Christian faith-an exposition of the Westney Catechism-Joshua Press (2018) p 133

[64] World Council of Churches - Baptism, Eucharist and Ministry p9

[65] Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels by Brown, Jeannine K. Green, Joel B. Perrin, Nicholas p 66

[66] (Church Basics) Bobby Jamieson - Understanding Baptism-B&H Publishing Group (2016) p9

[67]Scott W. Hahn - Romans-Baker Publishing Group (2017) p 150

[68] Anselm Grun - Seven Sacraments-Continuum (2003) p7

[69] Craig A Carter - The faith once delivered_ An introduction to the basics of the Christian faith-an exposition of the Westney Catechism-Joshua Press (2018) p 138

[70] Believers Baptism Sign of the New Covenant in Christ by Thomas R. Schreiner, Shawn Wright p 27

[71] (Church Basics) Bobby Jamieson - Understanding Baptism-B&H Publishing Group (2016) p16

[72] Believers Baptism Sign of the New Covenant in Christ by Thomas R. Schreiner, Shawn Wright p 27

[73] (Church Basics) Bobby Jamieson - Understanding Baptism-B&H Publishing Group (2016) p 12

[74] Believers Baptism Sign of the New Covenant in Christ by Thomas R. Schreiner, Shawn Wright p 27 -28

[75] Larry E. Dyer - Baptism – The Believers First Obedience-Kregel Publications,U.S. (2020) p20

[76] (Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture_ Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture, New Testament) Gerald L. Bray – Romans p148

[77] C. E. B. Cranfield - A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans-Bloomsbury T&T Clark (1975) p299-300

[78] (Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament) Thomas R. Schreiner - Romans-Baker Publishing Group (2018) p 423

[79] Craig A Carter - The faith once delivered_ An introduction to the basics of the Christian faith-an exposition of the Westney Catechism-Joshua Press (2018) p144

[80] (Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture_ Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture, New Testament) Gerald L. Bray – Romans p148

[81] C. E. B. Cranfield - A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans-Bloomsbury T&T Clark (1975) p299-300

[82] (Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament) Thomas R. Schreiner - Romans-Baker Publishing Group (2018) p 423

[83]Against Heresies 2.22.4)

[84] Edward Charles Whitaker - Documents of the baptismal liturgy-S.P.C.K. (1970) p 7

[85] The Beginning of Infant Baptism 3- 4

[86] Commentary on Roman 5.9.11 (FC 103, p. 367).

[87] The Beginning of Infant Baptism p 4

[88] Thurian, Max_ Wainwright, Geoffrey - Baptism and Eucharist ecumenical convergence in celebration-Eerdmans (1986) p9

[89] (9780980006650) Kenneth J. Howell_ Ignatius of Antioch_ Polycarp - Ignatius of Antioch & Polycarp of Smyrna_ A New Translation and Theological Commentary (Early Christian Fathers Series) (2009)p 150

[90] This text1 dates from approximately A.D. 215. It professes to be an account of the liturgical and pastoral practices which were then current and customary in Rome. It is one of the earliest available documents of the Western church’s baptismal tradition and has been formative in later development.

[91] Thurian, Max_ Wainwright, Geoffrey - Baptism and Eucharist ecumenical convergence in celebration-Eerdmans (1986) XIV,1-3

[92] Thurian, Max_ Wainwright, Geoffrey - Baptism and Eucharist ecumenical convergence in celebration-Eerdmans (1986) XX-1

[93] Joseph Martos, Doors to the Sacred" A Historical Introduction to Sacraments in the Catholic

Church (Chicago: Triumph Books. 1991), 164-5,

[94] III Ben Witherington,Troubled Waters -Rethinking the Theology of Baptism Baylor University Press (2007)p 22

[95] Ancient_Baptism_Practices_and_Jesus_Desc p10

[96] (Studies in the Dead Sea Scrolls & Related Literature) Jodi Magness - The Archaeology of Qumran and the Dead Sea Scrolls-Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company (2002)p33

[97] Robert Feather - The Secret Initiation of Jesus at Qumran_ The Essene Mysteries of John the Baptist p 281

[98] Robert Feather - The Secret Initiation of Jesus at Qumran_ The Essene Mysteries of John the Baptist p 282

[99] (Studies in the Dead Sea Scrolls & Related Literature) Jodi Magness - The Archaeology of Qumran and the Dead Sea Scrolls-Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company (2002) p138

[100]Novatian was a prominent early Christian theologian and priest in Rome during the 3rd century, known for his strict views on church purity and his role in what became known as the Novatianist schism. He lived from 200–258 AD. During a time of Roman persecution of Christians, especially under Emperor Decius (249–251 AD), many Christians (known as lapsi) renounced their faith to avoid torture or death, which caused major divisions within the church afterwards. He held a strict view that refused readmission to communion of lapsi.

[101] (Fathers of the Church Patristic Series) Cyprian - Letters, (1-81)-The Catholic University of America Press (2013) pXX

[102] (Fathers of the Church Patristic Series) Cyprian - Letters, (1-81)-The Catholic University of America Press (2013) pXX-XX1

[103] The traditional date for the council is 217.

[104] David Rankin - Tertullian and the Church (1995) p 14

[105] (The Fathers of the Church_ A New Translation_ 61) Saint Cyril of Jerusalem - The Works of Saint Cyril of Jerusalem, Volume 1_ Procatechesis and Catecheses 1-12-The Catholic University of America Press.p76

[106] (Fathers of the Church Patristic Series) Cyprian - Letters, (1-81)-The Catholic University of America Press (2013) p 252

[107] Craig A Carter - The faith once delivered_ An introduction to the basics of the Christian faith-an exposition of the Westney Catechism-Joshua Press (2018)p 141

[108] Benjamin B. Warfield, The Archæology of the Mode of Baptism, The American Journal of Theology , Jan., 1897, Vol. 1, No. 1 (Jan., 1897), pp. 256-258