Most of the sources I looked at explain the difference between 'immerse'Just a guess: An agent "Immerses" itself in whatever while "submerse" is
and 'submerse' as the metaphorical use of the former in contrast to
physical meaning of the latter (covered in liquid).
Hence:
" 'Immerse' is often used to describe a deep mental engagement or
absorption in something, such as becoming completely focused on a task
or subject. On the other hand, 'submerse' typically refers to the
physical act of going under water or putting something beneath the
surface of a liquid. "
Yet, we have immersion heaters (electrical elements submerged in water).
We also have (in some Christian sects) baptism by immersion in water -
or is it submersion?
Likewise, in cookery we soak the dry beans by immersing them in water overnight. (Never seen 'submerse' in this context.)
<https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=immerse%2Csubmerse%2Cimmersible%2Csubmersible&year_start=1800&year_end=2022&corpus=en&smoothing=3>
Yet, we have immersion heaters (electrical elements submerged in water).
We also have (in some Christian sects) baptism by immersion in water -
or is it submersion?
On Sun, 16 Aug 2026 21:36:35 +0200, occam <occam@nowhere.nix> wrote:
Yet, we have immersion heaters (electrical elements submerged in water).
We also have (in some Christian sects) baptism by immersion in water -
or is it submersion?
Some Baptists insist that it should be "submersion".
The methods of Christian baptism were generally referred to as
aspersion, affusion and immersion, until the Baptists thought that
there wasn't a sufficient distinction between affusion and immersion,
and therefore added submersion.
The Church of England was initially quite explicit in its
instructions, that, in the case of small children, the minister was to
dip first the left side, then the right side, then the front, in the
water. I think that counted as immersion, but not submersion.
Later the CofE was not quite so excplicit and simply instructed the
minister to "dip it in the water discretely and warily" but if the
parents and godparents certified that the child was not able to bear
ity, it was permissible to pour water on it.
I suppose it was the insufficiency of that in the eyes of the Baptists
that led them to substitute "submersion" for "immersion".
I'm not sufficiently clued up in Greek to know which is the better translation of "baptizo".
On 17/08/2026 08:24, Steve Hayes wrote:
On Sun, 16 Aug 2026 21:36:35 +0200, occam <occam@nowhere.nix>
wrote:
Yet, we have immersion heaters (electrical elements submerged in
water). We also have (in some Christian sects) baptism by
immersion in water - or is it submersion?
Some Baptists insist that it should be "submersion".
The methods of Christian baptism were generally referred to as
aspersion, affusion and immersion, until the Baptists thought that
there wasn't a sufficient distinction between affusion and
immersion, and therefore added submersion.
The Church of England was initially quite explicit in its
instructions, that, in the case of small children, the minister was
to dip first the left side, then the right side, then the front, in
the water. I think that counted as immersion, but not submersion.
Later the CofE was not quite so excplicit and simply instructed
the minister to "dip it in the water discretely and warily" but if
the parents and godparents certified that the child was not able to
bear ity, it was permissible to pour water on it.
I suppose it was the insufficiency of that in the eyes of the
Baptists that led them to substitute "submersion" for "immersion".
I'm not sufficiently clued up in Greek to know which is the better
translation of "baptizo".
That's Greek. Therefor a translation from the Hebrew. What does the
Bible say? John the baptiser must've had a word for it.
On 17/08/26 16:27, occam wrote:
On 17/08/2026 08:24, Steve Hayes wrote:
On Sun, 16 Aug 2026 21:36:35 +0200, occam <occam@nowhere.nix>
wrote:
Yet, we have immersion heaters (electrical elements submerged in
water). We also have (in some Christian sects) baptism by
immersion in water - or is it submersion?
Some Baptists insist that it should be "submersion".
The methods of Christian baptism were generally referred to as
aspersion, affusion and immersion, until the Baptists thought that
there wasn't a sufficient distinction between affusion and
immersion, and therefore added submersion.
The Church of England was initially quite explicit in its
instructions, that, in the case of small children, the minister was
to dip first the left side, then the right side, then the front, in
the water. I think that counted as immersion, but not submersion.
Later the CofE was not quite so excplicit and simply instructed
the minister to "dip it in the water discretely and warily" but if
the parents and godparents certified that the child was not able to
bear ity, it was permissible to pour water on it.
I suppose it was the insufficiency of that in the eyes of the
Baptists that led them to substitute "submersion" for "immersion".
I'm not sufficiently clued up in Greek to know which is the better
translation of "baptizo".
That's Greek. Therefor a translation from the Hebrew. What does the
Bible say? John the baptiser must've had a word for it.
John was not a true Baptist. Instead of having a bathtub in a church, he
used a river.
| Sysop: | Amessyroom |
|---|---|
| Location: | Fayetteville, NC |
| Users: | 74 |
| Nodes: | 6 (1 / 5) |
| Uptime: | 51:13:13 |
| Calls: | 1,101 |
| Calls today: | 1 |
| Files: | 1,339 |
| Messages: | 276,016 |