The Highway Forums General Discussion Theology Discussion Forum Baptism Question

I was recently told the following and to be quite frank I don’t remember hearing/reading this before in 45 years as a Christian.
I do not want to dismiss it, before I at least do some research.
This site is where I thought I would start that research.

1. Given the names of the authors, I doubt the reliability of their source materials.
2. Given the summary as written, I would have to guess that the source material is from the Roman State Church, e.g., notice the word "Eucharist".
3. Others who have studied the subject of baptism would strongly disagree that this practice, if it actually was done, was restricted to some obscure group and not universally in the Church. See, for example, The Token of the Covenant by Rev. William MacIntyre, especially in section II "Mode of Baptism".

Pilgrim
I have done a bit of research since and to my surprise it was a practice of some in the early Church.
Yet, that does not mean it was a biblical practice.

From my research of the early Church, I found that in the Roman culture, nudity was a common practice. However, in both
Jewish and early Christian culture; they were concerned with modesty.
So, I would take being baptized in the nude as an extreme.
Which should not surprise me with the mankind, even in the early Church.

I thought I would mention, I did notice one of the sources is Douglas Moo. I know very little about him;
But his bio says he is a “Reformed New Testament Scholar.”

I will read the link you gave me later, thanks.

Tom

Pilgrim

I did a quick look through the article you provided and I am very familiar with much of what it said. As I have often read through articles on baptism that the Highway provides and I appreciate them.

However, was there something you had in mind that you thought would help my research, on the particular matter of my research?

I read both books and articles by Paedo and Credo authors and I am glad I do. Mainly, because it helped me realize both sides often speak right past each other.
Which I recently shared with you, concerning a Reformed Baptist, that got upset with me, because I tried to correct his misunderstand concerning Paedo-Baptist teaching.
It appears he believes I am a Paedo-Baptist in disguise.
I believe you rightly called him Woke on the subject.

Tom

Yes, in the article McIntyre deals with the subject of "mode" and shows that immersion could not have been the practice for practical reasons. As you pointed out above and which I should have included in my reply to you, no Jew and most non-Roman Gentiles would ever have stripped naked before anyone outside of their marriage partner; not even their own children. Such practice is in total violation of OT teaching. Thus, changing booths, for example, would have been constructed where those to be baptized would have put on clothing other than their clothes being warn since immersion would have left them completely soaked. And, as he pointed out, the time element certainly wouldn't have been possible either. Thus, McIntyre concluded that either effusion or aspersion must have been used to accommodate the thousands of people that had been converted in one day. So, the point to be made is that the biblical narrative must stand and the example for all time regarding baptism which most assuredly did not include participates stripping all their clothing off before others in order to be baptized. And, as already mentioned, there is no mention whatsoever in the biblical narratives where baptism was done that the "Eucharist" was administered immediately afterward. On those two elements alone, I totally reject the implication that nude baptisms with the celebration of the Eucharist was a normal and/or widespread practice among the Churches. Sects and all kinds of aberrant practices surely existed in the early days of the visible church period. For, even in the Epistles we read of false teachers, false prophets, and gross practices being done of which the Apostles strongly rejected and demanded that those involved should be discipled and even excommunicated from the assemblies.

Pilgrim

My research into the early Church leads me to believe that there
were both baptisms by immersion and sprinkling.
It usually had to do with what was available.

That is all I really want to say concerning that.

Well, you should know my position: immersion, aspersion and aspersion are all biblically acceptable modes for baptism. ALL are found in Scripture and should never be a criteria to judge one's legitimacy especially when it comes to membership in Christ's Church. A credible profession/possession of faith worked by the Spirit in a person's soul is what counts with a right knowledge of the one true God and being justified through union with Christ. All else is superfluous and serves to destroy what God has intended for His people to be gathered into one.

Pilgrim

Before I even made this thread, I did not want to get into a discussion about modes of baptism, such as immersion or sprinkling. We both know each other’s position on that and I respect you a lot, or I would not have stayed on this site for so many years.
I for one, have benefited greatly by this site.

I wanted to keep this thread just to the particular subject at hand. I had never heard of this before and I thought the Highway would be a great place to find out the truth on this issue.

Tom