[I apologize that is taken me so long to get back to this earlier article. It really needed editing for grammar and further clarification. As usual with these older articles, I found some things that could be misleading and rewrote them. I hope these revisions will help the reader better understand this topic. Having Grammarly for grammar and clarification is a great help.]
Baptism is one of the topics that has caused serious division in the Christian church, yet some call it a non-essential doctrine, you know, one of those doctrines that people should not divide over. The problem is not that people shouldn’t have divided over this issue, but that they have, and, while not as violent as in the past, the intense debate continues to this day.
What I am presenting in this article is an overview of the theological viewpoints taught by churches and theologians that I found when researching what people were taught about baptism. I will present what I believe is the pure scriptural view later, both at the end of this article and in other places.
I don’t know of any Christian church that doesn’t teach baptism, but there are major disputes in some areas. Is water baptism required for salvation? Is water baptism the point of spiritual regeneration? Should babies be baptized? Is sprinkling with “holy” water sufficient, or is immersion required for water baptism? Is there a second baptism where one is baptized with the holy spirit? Or did spirit baptism replace water baptism altogether? There are numerous points of contention among believers regarding baptism.
For this article, our first focus will be on the manner of baptism debated in various churches.
There are two viewpoints regarding the manner of water baptism. Something that amazed me was the realization that some theologians will tell you that even though they might believe one of these viewpoints, the other is legitimately viable in the Bible. The main water baptism viewpoints are infant baptism and believer’s baptism. Adding to the confusion is a small segment that teaches that spirit baptism alone is sufficient. Churches are all over the board when it comes to this teaching. What is amazing is that, theologically and scripturally, according to them, there is no clear-cut decision when weighing the differences between these viewpoints, even though theologians become adamant on one side or the other.
Infant baptism centers around the doctrine that baptism after Christ replaces the Jewish practice of circumcision. Infant baptism is implied, according to this theology, in the biblical accounts where whole households were baptized in the book of Acts.
“Believer’s baptism” centers on the doctrine that, to become a Christian, one must consciously choose to follow Christ. Consequently, since infants are incapable of making this choice, infant baptism is not valid. Additionally, this faction places heavy emphasis on the need for baptism to be by full immersion in water. The reasons for this include the fact that the Greek word for baptism conveys the idea of dipping or immersion. Additionally, as illustrated in practice in the Gospels and elsewhere, the people were immersed.
Modern theologians will say that even though they do not believe the other viewpoints regarding baptism, these viewpoints are acceptable within the realm of orthodoxy. That is just their way of saying that there is no clear way of proving in the Bible that their viewpoint is the true viewpoint while another is not. This is a conundrum. A conundrum is a riddle, an enigma, some concept that is too difficult or impossible to explain. Baptism in the Bible falls into that category.
It’s not that all theologians don’t say that the meaning behind baptism is the same. Indeed they do, for they all point to the same verse in the book of Romans as to the meaning of baptism.
We were buried therefore with him through baptism unto death: that like as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, so we also might walk in newness of life. Rom 6:4ASV
Many groups say that baptism is symbolic of dying with Christ, and being raised with him in newness of life, just as the words in the book of Romans say here. Where they differ is in the manner and details. And the reason they differ in manner and details goes far deeper. These different camps differ in basic theological perspective on the meaning and interpretation of the Bible.
Roman Catholic and some mainline Protestant denominations base their interpretation on what is called covenant theology. The perspective of this group, in a nutshell, says that baptism is the sign of the new covenant as circumcision was the sign of the old covenant. Furthermore, they say that baptism is a sacrament, a ritual that, in itself, bestows the grace of God upon a person. In contrast, bible and evangelical perspectives emphasize other theologies like dispensationalism, and say that baptism is an ordinance, carried out in the manner that Jesus was baptized by John, that is, being immersed in water, following his example, signifying or testifying our allegiance to him. Then there are those, although few, that say that baptism is an act of the spirit, as opposed to an act that we do, that is, the cleansing action of the spirit being created in us is the baptism. We will talk about this more later.
So we have different practices among the churches regarding baptism. Churches like the Roman Catholic, Episcopal, and Lutheran churches practice infant baptism. They teach that with this ritual, the young infant is now a member of the church. They sprinkle or pour small amounts of water onto infants during the practice. However, Baptist, evangelical, and charismatic churches, for the most part, teach that infant baptism is wrong, and you must be immersed in water at the age of consent to be truly baptized. Most of these churches call the practice “Believer’s baptism”. Some churches teach that you must be re-baptized if you were infant baptized. Complicating this, some churches teach that you must be baptized to be saved, while others teach that baptism, while commanded, is not necessary for salvation.
Only a small percentage of churches, mainly Pentecostal and charismatic churches, teach spirit baptism. For the vast majority who believe in spirit baptism, spirit baptism is a second baptism. Some churches will teach you that speaking in tongues must accompany spirit baptism, while others hold that speaking in tongues is not required while being baptized in the spirit.
It must be said, though, that there are verses that point to the replacement of water baptism with spirit baptism:
And while staying with them he ordered them not to depart from Jerusalem, but to wait for the promise of the Father, which, he said, “you heard from me; for John baptized with water, but you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit not many days from now.” (Act 1:4-5 ESV)
The above verse makes several declarations. It says:
- John’s baptism was with water
- In contrast, baptism with the Holy Spirit is coming in a matter of days
- The promise of the Father is fulfilled with the baptism of the Holy Spirit
Don’t you see that water baptism is being replaced here? One keyword is “but.” You were baptized with water, BUT you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit. The word “but” here indicates the replacement for water baptism is spirit baptism.
Again, though, spirit baptism is a second baptism to most churches that teach it. The Apostles were water baptized by John or his followers and then experienced the Spirit baptism on the day of Pentecost. Also, there are records in Acts where speaking in tongues and prophecy are part of the baptismal record. Some churches will teach you that speaking in tongues must accompany spirit baptism, while others hold that speaking in tongues is not required while being baptized in the spirit.
On the other hand are churches that teach that this is wrong. They follow the cessation doctrine that says tongues ceased with the apostles. The Episcopal Church is one of the churches that expressly states, “Any view of tongues which sees this phenomenon as an essential sign of the baptism of the Holy Spirit is contradictory to Scripture”. [i] A minor number of churches teach that spirit baptism occurs at the moment of salvation, and of these, there are a few that teach that the baptism of the spirit regenerating the life of a person is the only baptism a person needs.
While baptism is one of the most widely promoted practices in Christendom, many churches have split over it. The Anabaptist movement in the 16th century had believer’s baptism as one of its principal tenets. It was considered heresy at that time not only by the Roman Catholic Church but also by other Reformation participants. Thousands were put to death, and many more were tortured and endured various other persecutions.[ii]
Baptism is a topic with multiple points of contention. As confusing as this all may sound so far, in truth, we have yet to see all the points that make this conundrum so baffling to many including theologians.
Baptism Doctrine: What is the Meaning of Baptism
Water baptism is a beautiful ceremony. Whether it be infant baptism, where loving parents give their children to be ceremoniously washed, or “believer’s baptism,” where the new commitment of believers to testify their allegiance to the Lord Jesus Christ often brings tears to the eyes of the beholders, in any case, water baptism is a beautiful thing. Likewise, I would like to say that Spirit baptism is an all-inspiring sight. Watching believers receive the power of the Holy Spirit into their lives is pure joy.
Nevertheless, being a beautiful and touching ceremony does not make it righteous. It doesn’t make it the one baptism that we will look at later in scripture.
Looking more at the scriptures churches use to substantiate the differing baptism practices in different churches, there are many passages in the Bible that discuss baptism. From the famous places like Jesus being baptized in the Jordan to the many references in the Gospels and the book of Acts where people are baptized, to the less well-known verses in the Old Testament, baptism is a topic that is woven through the Scriptures. But while we have many verses that discuss baptism, only a few explain what it means. The vast majority of the other verses are examples of baptisms in various forms, but by themselves, they don’t really teach what baptism is.
As I visited churches and investigated their doctrines, I found the following verses to be almost universally relied upon to explain their practice of baptism:
Or are ye ignorant that all we who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death?
We were buried therefore with him through baptism unto death: that like as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, so we also might walk in newness of life. Rom 6:3-4ASV
These verses give the meaning of baptism as analogous to Christ’s dying and resurrection. From church to church, the words ring out, “as you go down into the water you die with Christ, as you come out of the water you are raised with him.” While the words may be paraphrased from church to church, the explanation is nevertheless the same. Water baptism proponents explained that when you are immersed in water, it symbolizes being in the tomb with the dead Christ. They further teach that coming up out of the water symbolizes our being raised with Christ. There are no verses that specifically say that you must be immersed in water to be baptized. Baptism by immersion in water is taught using the example of Jesus, as well as some aspects of the derivation of the word “baptism,” which comes from the word “bapto.” “Bapto” means to dip.
The verses in Romans say that baptism is dying with Christ as he died and rising with him as he rose from the dead. The verse doesn’t say whether the baptism is water. While this analogy is used by some to argue water baptism as symbolic, it really shows the actual process of Spirit baptism, where a new believer is washed in the Spirit and raised, born again, into new life. After all, Jesus was dead. And when he was resurrected, he was “born again”, into new life, just as we are when we claim his sacrifice for us, and enter into new life.
Spirit baptism is not symbolically represented in Romans 6:3-4 because Jesus’s sacrifice literally paid the price for our sin. He was our ransom.
Who gave himself as a ransom for all; the testimony in its own times;
(1 Timothy 2:6 WEB)
Instead of us having to die for our sins, Jesus died in our place. It’s not symbolic. We were washed clean with his death. It wasn’t symbolic. It was literal.
Nevertheless, in the vast majority of cases, the teacher will read “water” into Romans 6:3-4 as well as the majority of verses that talk about baptism because that is the most common Christian tradition regarding baptism.
The question is what God meant when he inspired Paul to write these verses. Again, we are getting to that.
Once these verses are explained, the rest of the doctrine on baptism that the particular church would teach would often receive sketchy treatment. But I also found other commonly used verses. For example:
that aforetime were disobedient, when the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls, were saved through water:
which also after a true likeness doth now save you, even baptism, not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the interrogation of a good conscience toward God, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ; 1Pe 3:20-21ASV
This verse, which does have both the words “baptism” and “water” in it, is frequently used to prove that water baptism is what Christ wants for us. If you read these verses carefully, you will see that the analogy of water used to save eight people is compared to baptism. But the analogy is not complete in verse 20. Because after the writer says “even baptism”, he says in the next verse, “not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the interrogation of a good conscience toward God, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ; Here, the writer corrects the understanding about baptism being physically washed in water, but rather it is the inward cleansing through the power of the resurrection of Jesus Christ. Part of the process to be spiritually washed is our recognition that we need a savior because we have sin in our lives. We have become aware that we have sin, and call on Jesus, making him Lord, and accept the gracious gift of eternal life. Holy spirit fills us and washes away our sin. None of this is symbolic. This is literally what happens.
So the context of this verse is not a proof that baptism should be in water for us as much as it is a proof that baptism, the real baptism, is when we are washed inside.
A key point relevant to all of this is Paul’s teaching that there is one baptism. Focusing on this point helps clarify the debate over water baptism vs. spirit baptism.
There is one body, and one Spirit, even as you also were called in one hope of your calling; one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all, who is over all, and through all, and in us all.
(Ephesians 4:4-6 WEB)
Now, this is interesting, despite the verses that seem to indicate that there is both a baptism with the spirit for believers and a baptism in water, that verse declares there is just one baptism.
Also, it brings to mind a famous verse in Deuteronomy.
Hear, Israel: Yahweh is our God. Yahweh is one.
(Deuteronomy 6:4)
Just as there is only one God, there is only one baptism. We are baptized with one spirit. The apostle Paul puts it another way in first Corinthians.
For in one Spirit we were all baptized into one body, whether Jews or Greeks, whether bond or free; and were all given to drink into one Spirit.
(1 Corinthians 12:13 WEB)
Nevertheless, in the various churches, no matter which viewpoint is presented, the real meaning of baptism is that we are washed in the blood of Christ and given glorious eternal life. In another article, we will look at why we even have this word “baptism”, which is a transliteration of a Greek word baptizo, and how even having this transliteration is part of the baptism mystique that seems to confuse many .
[i]http://www.pcahistory.org/documents/pastoralletter.html
[ii]http://reformedperspectives.org/newfiles/jac_arnold/CH.Arnold.RMT.10.html
© copyright 2020 – 2026 Mark W Smith All rights reserved. last revised 1/26/2026