Immersion, Submersion, and Other Ways of Baptizing

[gcdonner]

1st century Judaism conducted ritual purification stark naked. That’s what I said.

There is no reason to believe John’s baptism or early baptisms in Acts would have deviated from how ritual purification was already done, which every observant Jew would have done many times prior to meeting John or Jesus.

Can you give documentation for the Jewish practice? This is the first I have heard of that practice. Thanks
I have found that "naked" as we use the term today is not the same implication as "naked" had in biblical times. There is evidence to show that the one being immersed likely had a simple undergarment on and men & women didn't necessarily participate at the same time.

[Sudsy]

There is another re-baptism instruction set out in the Didache regarding water baptism that I don't hear talked about much -

(4) Before the baptism [baptizomenos] the one baptizing [baptizon] and the one being baptized [baptizomenos] are to fast, and any others who are able. Command the one being baptized [baptizomenon] to fast beforehand a day or two.

Does anyone know of this practise being followed today ? I would be surprised to hear of baptismal classes prior to baptism teaching and requiring this practise which does not appear in the NT anywhere.

I believe man has a tendency to 'one up' on many things that are quite simple to begin with. I do know of a church that baptises by immersion the very same day the person first confesses Jesus as their Lord and Saviour. There is no proving time required and baptism is looked at as an immediate testimony to others that they have been born again and are now a Christ follower. This seems to me to be the closest to what we read in the NT.

[Josh]

1st century Judaism conducted ritual purification stark naked. That’s what I said.

There is no reason to believe John’s baptism or early baptisms in Acts would have deviated from how ritual purification was already done, which every observant Jew would have done many times prior to meeting John or Jesus.

Can you give documentation for the Jewish practice? This is the first I have heard of that practice. Thanks
I have found that "naked" as we use the term today is not the same implication as "naked" had in biblical times. There is evidence to show that the one being immersed likely had a simple undergarment on and

Not offhand but there are large amounts of research and scholarship on Jewish customs, particularly of second-temple Judaism. Ritual cleansing was always done naked (do you shower or bathe with clothes on), often in private. To this day, people who use rivers or lakes to cleanse themselves do so naked - they simply get under the water to preserve their modesty and often this is a sex-segregated area of life.

men & women didn't necessarily participate at the same time.

Of course not; from ancient times to present days, the miqveh attendant would be of the same sex as the people using it. We can safely presume no women got baptised during John's baptism and indeed see none in scripture.

I would assume that the 5,000 who were baptised simply did so in the miqvehs and temples that were already available to them. (I very much doubt they performed a 21st century style Baptist baptism or a 15th century style Anabaptist baptism).

The early church also baptised stark naked, and indeed conducted baptisms at night, under a new moon, to preserve the modesty of women, according to some historical records. Eventually this practice was abandoned as it was a poor witness to pagan neighbours, and the custom of baptismal garments emerged. This happened around the same time frame as simple pouring become more acceptable and children of believers were baptised younger and younger.

[gcdonner]

1st century Judaism conducted ritual purification stark naked. That’s what I said.

There is no reason to believe John’s baptism or early baptisms in Acts would have deviated from how ritual purification was already done, which every observant Jew would have done many times prior to meeting John or Jesus.

Can you give documentation for the Jewish practice? This is the first I have heard of that practice. Thanks
I have found that "naked" as we use the term today is not the same implication as "naked" had in biblical times. There is evidence to show that the one being immersed likely had a simple undergarment on and

Not offhand but there are large amounts of research and scholarship on Jewish customs, particularly of second-temple Judaism. Ritual cleansing was always done naked (do you shower or bathe with clothes on), often in private. To this day, people who use rivers or lakes to cleanse themselves do so naked - they simply get under the water to preserve their modesty and often this is a sex-segregated area of life.

men & women didn't necessarily participate at the same time.

Of course not; from ancient times to present days, the miqveh attendant would be of the same sex as the people using it. We can safely presume no women got baptised during John's baptism and indeed see none in scripture.

I would assume that the 5,000 who were baptised simply did so in the miqvehs and temples that were already available to them. (I very much doubt they performed a 21st century style Baptist baptism or a 15th century style Anabaptist baptism).

The early church also baptised stark naked, and indeed conducted baptisms at night, under a new moon, to preserve the modesty of women, according to some historical records. Eventually this practice was abandoned as it was a poor witness to pagan neighbours, and the custom of baptismal garments emerged. This happened around the same time frame as simple pouring become more acceptable and children of believers were baptised younger and younger.

What context are you extrapolating "5000 who were baptized"? BTW, if you had actually read my earlier posts you would have seen that I mentioned the 120 miqveh around the temple mount precincts.

[Josh]

The 5,000 added to the church in Acts. My opinion is that would have been baptised however they normally did their ritual cleansing.

John’s baptism was somewhat unique as he was a prophet urging people to repent, and be ritually washed as part of that repentance. Ordinarily people went to the temple or another similar facility. Getting ritually cleansed on the spot was a sign of deeper repentance, but also had plenty of precedent in Jewish culture and Jewish prophets.

[Sudsy]

The 5,000 added to the church in Acts. My opinion is that would have been baptised however they normally did their ritual cleansing.

John’s baptism was somewhat unique as he was a prophet urging people to repent, and be ritually washed as part of that repentance. Ordinarily people went to the temple or another similar facility. Getting ritually cleansed on the spot was a sign of deeper repentance, but also had plenty of precedent in Jewish culture and Jewish prophets.

How did you arrive at the 5,000 number ? Acts 2:41

Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls.

[ohio jones]

How did you arrive at the 5,000 number ? Acts 2:41

Acts 4:4, probably.

[Josh]

How did you arrive at the 5,000 number ? Acts 2:41

Acts 4:4, probably.

Good point. I was making an assumption the extra 2,000 were also baptised, although it's not entirely clear if they were.

In any case, our modern day view of and experience of baptism seems to be radically different than how the early believers would have understand ritual cleansing, miqveh, and what became to be known as baptizo.

[mennonitemom1]

[/quote]

Good post!
I’ve been immersersed into a baptismal and also the didache style….
[/quote]

Which one in the didache?
[/quote]

pouring in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit

[gcdonner]

Good post!
I’ve been immersersed into a baptismal and also the didache style….
[/quote]

Which one in the didache?
[/quote]

pouring in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit
[/quote]
Pouring was reserved for exceptions, if you have read the Didache. Have you?