Baptism has long been a point of conflict and even division among Christians. Almost every denomination has its own twist on baptism. I realized this when I attempted to join the only English-speaking Baptist church in the European city where I studied theology. I came as a card-carrying, ordained Baptist—with my letter of recommendation from another Baptist church. The pastor and deacons explained that in order to become a full member, I needed to be re-baptized because my baptism had been an “alien immersion.” I grew up and was baptized in a Pentecostal church. (My baptism may not have been Baptist, but it certainly was dramatic: I was 10, and it was in a gravel pit outside Des Moines.) I declined being re-baptized.
At least that Baptist church cared about baptism. Some churches today fall on the other end of the spectrum. For example, the Evangelical Free Church of America provides latitude on whether baptism should be required for church membership. Based on the denomination’s autonomy, it’s a local church matter.And some congregations believe the only requirement for church membership is simply being a born-again Christian. This stands in stark contrast with the New Testament and all of Christian history. For the apostles and faithful Christians after them, baptism was a necessary rite of passage for joining the church.
While Christians generally agree that baptism is important for discipleship, many have divided over its correct meaning and practice. Paul’s words to the Ephesians—”There is . . . one Lord, one faith, one baptism” (4:4–5
Christianity Today: Water Works: Why Baptism is Essential Issue:July/August 2014, Vol. 58, No. 6, Pg 56, “Water Works”
Views on Baptism
The vast majority of Christian traditions perform baptisms, but the way these traditions baptize their members varies. The chart below details baptismal practices in different traditions with biblical passages used in support.
Of course these are not the only Christian traditions that baptize, but these four provide a good sample of the variety of baptisms and the ideas behind them. Each tradition’s approach to baptism will vary in a number of respects, and the verses provided have different emphases that are used to support the four different views.
Bible Journey, Study 4: The Gospels, Course 2: Life, Ministry and Identity of Jesus, Lesson 2: Baptism & the Desert, In Front | Workbook: Baptism Today
Most Christians throughout history have agreed that baptism is an act of obedience to Jesus Christ, who commanded that his followers be baptized and baptize each other. Jesus inextricably connects discipleship and baptism in the Great Commission: “Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit” (Matt. 28:19). And at the conclusion of his Pentecost sermon, the apostle Peter told listeners, “Repent and be baptized, every one of you” (Acts 2:38). The very word Christian means “Christ follower,” and rejecting or willfully neglecting baptism is disobeying Christ.
Baptism is necessary for salvation
In line with Cyprian (a third-century bishop of Carthage), most Eastern Orthodox, Roman Catholics, and some Protestants believe baptism is the “laver of salvation.” According to this view—known as “baptismal regeneration”—the water does not save, but God saves at baptism.
Proponents of baptismal regeneration appeal to Scripture such as 1 Peter 3:21, “Baptism . . . now saves you,” and Mark 16:16, “The one who believes and is baptized will be saved” (nrsv)
Protestants who affirm baptismal regeneration insist faith is necessary for salvation. So the faith of the infant’s parents and of the congregation stands in until the child is old enough to confirm his or her personal faith. During the Reformation, Martin Luther and his followers rejected the Catholic doctrine that baptism imparts saving grace ex opere operato—by virtue of the act itself apart from faith, so long as it is performed properly by a priest.
Baptism not necessary for salvation
Few Christians say baptism is absolutely necessary for salvation. But the vast majority of Christians throughout history, including credobaptists, have believed baptism is an essential part of becoming a member of Christ’s body, the church, and of being a disciple in the fullest sense. A person who claims to be saved but refuses to be baptized may very well be saved but is not living out the Christian life in the fullest and truest sense. The majority of Christians everywhere and across denominations agree on that point.
Some credobaptists will balk at the claim that obeying Christ involves being baptized, because they deny a necessary link between water baptism and salvation.
Some Christians, such as Quakers and members of the Salvation Army, reject baptism entirely. And recently, one Texas megachurch pastor reported that nearly a third of the people who receive Christ in his church are never baptized. One response to the multiple views of baptism is to reject or neglect it entirely. Especially in large independent churches, baptism is often relegated to relative unimportance.
Methods of Baptism
Methods of baptism vary from one tradition to another. Three common methods are sprinkling, immersion and pouring. Each method has a biblical reference or precedent behind it.
Related Issues
Infant Baptism
Luther held fast to infant baptism and baptismal regeneration in the presence of faith. When critics asked him how an infant can have faith, Luther supposedly said, “Prove to me an infant can’t have faith. Hah!” For him and his followers, faith is a gift of God bestowed at baptism. And proxy faith stood in for the infant’s later, fuller, and more explicit faith.
Ulrich Zwingli, a Swiss contemporary of Luther and the father of the Reformed branch of Protestantism, denied that infants need salvation. For him, infants are innocent. So why baptize infants? To initiate them into the covenant relationship between God and his people.
According to Zwingli, infant baptism is the new covenant counterpart to circumcision in the old covenant. When an infant is baptized, she is assumed to be part of the people of God, unless she grows up to walk away from Christ. Proponents use Matthew 19:14 for support, where Jesus said, “Let the little children come to me . . . for it is to such as these that the kingdom of heaven belongs” (nrsv). Zwingli believed children are free of original guilt; thus, he denied baptismal regeneration. In fact, he believed elect children are saved whether they are baptized or not. However, like Hebrew children, they need to be included in covenant relationship with God. And that’s what baptism accomplishes, Zwingli said.
Christians who reject infant baptism appeal to New Testament passages that suggest faith comes before baptism: Believe and be baptized (Mark 16:16).
Some Zwingli followers wanted to abolish infant baptism, or paedobaptism (from pais in Greek, meaning “child or infant”), because it reminded them of the Catholicism the Reformers rejected. In 1525, several of them were re-baptized upon confessing their faith. Thus, they were called Anabaptists (from ana in Greek, meaning “over again”). Anabaptist theologian Balthasar Hubmaier said infant baptism is like a pub putting out a sign that says good wine before the grapes are harvested. To them baptism is a public act of commitment and should therefore be performed only on believers old enough to profess Christ. The term for this view is credobaptism (from credo in Latin, meaning “believe”). Anabaptists linked baptism to church discipline and argued that all baptized persons are subject to it. Underlying the Anabaptist view is the belief that Christian initiation begins with conversion, not baptism.
Is baptism a sacrament or an ordinance?
Many Christians, especially in liturgical churches, regard baptism as a work of the Holy Spirit in the person being baptized. To them, baptism is a sacrament that conveys grace—it may not save, but it plants a seed of grace and faith that will later blossom into personal repentance at conversion or confirmation (or both).
However, other Christians, mostly credobaptists in free church traditions, see baptism not as a sacrament that confers grace but rather as the individual’s response to regeneration, being born again at conversion. Thus, they categorize it as an ordinance. For them, the Spirit is already active in the person being baptized; baptism is simply a public testimony to the Spirit’s inward work, which began prior to baptism.
“Re-baptizing”
Paedobaptists look at credobaptists—who insist that infant baptism is no baptism at all and thus re-baptize believers who were baptized as infants—with horror because they see them as invalidating real baptisms. To paedobaptists, re-baptizing seems just as absurd as requiring re-marriage for church membership. It appears prideful and sectarian. They also believe credobaptists deny children full participation in the family of God.
On the other hand, credobaptists look at paedobaptists and think they are deluding people into believing they can be Christians without having personal faith. They see infant baptism, however understood, as no baptism at all but as infant dedication at best, with a little water. For credobaptists, persons baptized as infants often grow up thinking they’re already saved without having a true conversion experience.