The Evangelical Methodist Church allows the pastor and the family to determine whether to baptize or dedicate an infant. The traditional Methodist position of the sacrament of infant baptism is maintained, not as baptismal regeneration, but as a sign that replaces OT circumcision with water baptism (Colossians 2: 11-12) affirming the child covered by the atonement of Christ and a member of the covenant community of faith. The blood of Christ assures acceptance into heaven, not the sacrament of baptism. Baptism is the sign that one is a part of the family of faith whether an adult or infant. In light of the diversity of opinion on baptism and its various modes, i.e., sprinkle, pour, immerse, the EMC allows the choice to made by the pastor and the people.

The following is quoted from Dr. Laurence W. Wood and is used by permission:

1. Baptism probably involved the mode of sprinkling or pouring more often than immersion. The mode of baptism of course is not specified in Scripture. However, it seems that pouring or sprinkling would be preferred modes since these specific modes are used in reference to a “spiritual” type of baptism (Isa. 44:3; Ezek. 36:25; Joel 2:28; Acts 2:18, 33; Heb. 10:22; 12:24). To be sure, immersion was probably practiced even as it was in Judaism and other religions (see Kittel, “A Theological Word Book of the New Testament”, I, 535 et passim).

A. The Old Testament idea of a spiritual baptism always used the imagery of “sprinkling” or “pouring”, not immersion.

1. Ezekiel 36:25-26: “I will sprinkle clean water upon you and you shall be clean…I will put my Spirit within you.”

B. In the New Testament baptism does not necessarily mean immersion.

1. See Mark 7:4 where “sprinkling” hrantizo and “baptism” baptismos are used interchangeably.
2. See Luke 11:38 where baptism clearly does not mean immersion: “They marveled that he had not bathed (baptized) himself before dinner.”
3. Acts 1:5 makes a comparison between “baptism with water” and “baptism with the Spirit”, and Acts 2:17, 18, 33 use the imagery of “pouring” as an alternate description of being “baptized” with the Spirit, thus indicating that baptism does not necessarily mean immersion.

2. The concept of sprinkling is associated with the early practice of using a hyssop (a small, bushy plant) to sprinkle blood from the sacrificed lamb at the first Passover (Exodus 12:22) on the lintels of the Hebrew homes.

A. Hebrews 9:17-28 shows that the sprinkling of blood with a hyssop by Moses was a prototype of Christ shedding his own blood for his people.

1. Water baptism is the sacrament of rising of the crucified Jesus (Easter) and signifies our participation in the shedding of his blood (Romans 6).
2. The sprinkling of water signifies the sprinkling of his blood upon our lives and thus shows that we too participate in his death.
3. This imagery of “sprinkling” is thus a parallel picture of being “buried with him in baptism” (Romans 6:4).

B. Hebrews 10:19-22 equates “sprinkling” with “washing” when it refers to a spiritual baptism: “Therefore, brethren, since we have confidence to enter the sanctuary by the blood of Jesus…let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith, with our hearts sprinkled clean from an evil conscience and our bodies washed with pure water.”

1. Notice the parallelism: “hearts sprinkled” and “bodies washed.” “Sprinkling and “washing” are interchangeable.

C. David’s prayer of confession illustrates the use of sprinkling with a hyssop as a symbol of spiritual baptism when he cried out: “Purge me with hyssop and I shall be clean; wash me, and I shall be whiter than snow” (Psalm 51:7).

3. The mode of Jesus’ baptism is not stated in the text.

A. When John baptized “in Jordan”, the preposition “en” could just as correctly have been translated as “at” or “by” (Matthew 3:6).

1. Actually the preposition “in” (en) is more appropriately translated “at” or “by” in reference to rivers and there were several of them in Palestine (see I Kings 17:3, 5; II Kings 2:6, 7; 23:6). The prepositions thus denote the “place” rather than the “mode.”

B. The preposition “apo” often means “from” rather than “out of.” So Jesus “went up immediately from the water (the Jordan)” (Matthew 3:16). This does not necessarily mean that Jesus was immersed and came up out of the water having been submerged under it.

4. The mode of baptism for the Ethiopian Eunuch is not specified in the text in Acts 8: 38-39: “They both went down into (eis) the water, Phillip and the eunuch, and he baptized him. And when they came up out of (ek) the water, the Spirit of the Lord caught up Philip.”

A. The preposition “eis” means “to” as well as “into.” For example, Jesus went “into” (eis) the mountain (Matthew 4:8), but this preposition does not mean literally that Jesus went inside a cave or a hole inside the mountain.

B. The preposition (ek) means “from” as well as “out of.” The phrase “went down into” and “came up out of the water” (Acts 8:38-39) are not proofs for immersion. For these phrases literally say that both the baptizer (Philip) and the baptized (the Ethiopian Eunuch) went down into and came up out of the water. Taking the prepositional phrases to indicate immersion means that Philip was immersed at the same time as he immersed the eunuch, which is clearly not the sense of the phrase.

5. Other phrases such as “buried with Christ by baptism” (Romans 6:4) is a figure of speech like “planted” sumfutos (grown together, closely entwined) and “crucified” (Romans 6:6) with Christ.

A. These figures of speech imply our completion in Christ through a union with him. Such metaphors are not intended to be literal. Thus to use such metaphors as “buried” to mean immersion is to literalize their meaning beyond their original intent.

6. The word baptism actually functioned with a wider meaning than simply immersion.

A. Classical writers like Plutarch, Hippocrates and Aristotle used it to mean to moisten or sprinkle (see Wiley, “Christian Theology”, III, 177).

B. Paul said the Israelites were baptized in the cloud and in the sea (I Cor. 10:1-2) when he did not mean they were literally immersed in water.

7. Many circumstances in Scripture indicate a mode of baptism other than immersion.

A. With the baptism of Saul (Paul), we are told that he “arose and was baptized” presumably while still in the house of Ananias (Acts 9:18). Literally, the statement is that “standing up he was baptized.” The circumstance, of being in a home and standing up do not suggest immersion at all.

B. The circumstance of baptism of Cornelius does not suggest immersion. He was in the house when Peter preached to him. When Peter discerned that the Holy Spirit had come upon Cornelius, he said: “Can any one forbid water (from being brought into the house) for baptizing these people” (Acts 10:47).

1. Notice in verse 45 the imagery of the Spirit being “poured out even on the Gentiles.” These two facts imply that their baptism was by the mode of pouring, not immersion—(1) being in the house when water is requested to baptize these Gentiles, and (2) the imagery of the Spirit being “poured.”

C. The circumstances surrounding the baptism of the Philippian jailer in his home and at night surely do not suggest the mode of immersion in a river (Acts 16:33).

D. It is not likely that John the Baptist was able to immerse each new convert with the large number of people that came to the Jordan to be baptized by him. But the idea of John baptizing with a hyssop makes a lot of sense as he would sprinkle water on a number of persons at the same time.

E. It is doubtful that 3000, people were immersed, by the apostles on the day of Pentecost! (Acts 2:41)

8. The idea that immersion was the only proper mode of baptism dates back to the Anabaptists of the Reformation period and the Baptists of modern times with a corresponding emphasis on believer’s baptism and a rejection of infant baptism.

A. John Lawson writes: “There is, however, no necessary connection between believer’s baptism and total immersion. The ancient Church often practiced the immersion of infants, and the Orthodox, or Eastern, Church still does, while believer’s baptism by sprinkling or pouring is also used” (“Introduction to Christian Doctrine”, p. 169).

1. The general understanding of the church prior to this new development was that sprinkling, pouring, and immersion are all valid modes.

9. Immersion would seem in fact to be the least desirable mode since the other modes can be practiced anywhere—in the desert, in a house, in a prison, in the bed of a sick person, in all kinds of weather, and with decency and modesty.

A. This of course does not mean immersion is undesirable! And indeed one’s preferences should be respected in this matter.

Dr. Laurence W. Wood
Frank Paul Morris, Professor of Systematic Theology
Asbury Theological Seminary

Click here to download a PowerPoint presentation discussing Baptism