Baptism Before the Church

[Musicmaster]

Most professing believers in Christ have told me that they thought baptism was a creation of John the Baptist, when in fact it was not.

The ancient Jews were will acquainted with the practice of immersive baptism. One can read the writings of the historian Josephus who wrote about the Essene Jewish sect who practiced baptism as a welcoming and ceremonial cleansing of new converts into Judaism, which was the only means through which Gentiles could obtain salvation in ancient times.

This, then, explains why none of the Jews thought John the Baptist off his rocker for getting people wet since it was a demonstration of their faith in John's message about the need for repentance and preparation for entrance into the Millennial Kingdom of God that was at hand. John prepared the way for at least some acceptance through understanding by way of a practice the Jews were already knowledgeable.

For more reading on this:

A Short History if Jewishy Baptism

That's not to say that the above article is 100% correct, but it does give insights and cross-reference articles for additional learning.

MM

 

[Musicmaster]

This was an interesting statement from the site referenced below:

"Jesus did not need purification; yet He was baptized by John (Matthew 3:13–17). John’s baptism exemplifies the Jewish practice of mikveh as a way of rededication to God and His ways. Another way of describing this would be to baptize for “repentance,” the change of mind and actions away from one’s own direction and toward God. John’s was a baptism of repentance (Acts 19:4), and he taught that his baptism should inspire a change of a person’s life in preparation for the Messiah’s coming (Matthew 3:11)." (https://www.foi.org/2023/06/02/baptism-and-judaism/)

MM

 

[Magenta]

Baptism was also a prerequisite procedural part of taking up one's priestly duties .

Jesus was becoming our great new high priest, and we likewise become
priests through Him who called us out of darkness into His marvelous light.

 

[ChristRoseFromTheDead]

Baptism was also a prerequisite procedural part of taking up one's priestly duties .

Jesus was becoming our great new high priest, and we likewise become
priests through Him who called us out of darkness into His marvelous light.

Agree and Jesus' baptism was the fulfillment of that type and David's prphecy. and our's is as well

Explanation > https://christianchat.com/threads/christ-is-god.153694/post-5394373

.

 

[GWH]

Agree and Jesus' baptism was the fulfillment of that type and David's prphecy. and our's is as well

Explanation > https://christianchat.com/threads/christ-is-god.153694/post-5394373

.

My family has been baptized with the Baptist understanding that by this means or rite we profess our faith in Jesus, portray his death-burial-resurrection, and pledge to follow him as Lord.

Later in life I came to realize that outward water baptism also symbolizes inner Spirit baptism into the body of Christ.

 

[ChristRoseFromTheDead]

Later in life I came to realize that outward water baptism also symbolizes inner Spirit baptism into the body of Christ.

Yes it symbolizes cleansing, not of the flesh. but of the conscience by putting off the body of defiled flesh in death as we are immersed into the water, and then putting on the sinless resurrected Christ as we are raised out of the waters of death, which is also pictured by the circumcision of the heart

The like figure whereunto even baptism does also now save us, not by the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but by the answer of a good conscience toward God, though the resurrection of Jesus Christ: 1 Peter 3:21​

​

 

[Magenta]

Then cometh Jesus from Galilee to Jordan unto John, to be baptized of him. But John forbad him, saying, I have need to be baptized of thee, and comest thou to me? And Jesus answering said unto him, Suffer it to be so now: for thus it becometh us to fulfil all righteousness. Then he suffered him. ​

Exactly!!! .

 

[JMH]

Most professing believers in Christ have told me that they thought baptism was a creation of John the Baptist, when in fact it was not.

The ancient Jews were will acquainted with the practice of immersive baptism. One can read the writings of the historian Josephus who wrote about the Essene Jewish sect who practiced baptism as a welcoming and ceremonial cleansing of new converts into Judaism, which was the only means through which Gentiles could obtain salvation in ancient times.

This, then, explains why none of the Jews thought John the Baptist off his rocker for getting people wet since it was a demonstration of their faith in John's message about the need for repentance and preparation for entrance into the Millennial Kingdom of God that was at hand. John prepared the way for at least some acceptance through understanding by way of a practice the Jews were already knowledgeable.

For more reading on this:

A Short History if Jewishy Baptism

That's not to say that the above article is 100% correct, but it does give insights and cross-reference articles for additional learning.

MM

My dear brother in Christ, those Jews you reference about washed externally only,, yes.,,, however....it was not "their faith" that was demonstrated at the Jordon. And John did not prepare the way for "at least some" through their own understanding.. ??
You are missing the mark pretty big on the work of John the Baptist and what God spoke about though both prophets Isaiah and Ezekiel.

 

[ChristRoseFromTheDead]

As sons of Aaron were inducted into the priesthood of the order of Aaron by water immersion and being anointed with oil, so too we sons/daughers of God are inducted into the priesthood of the order of Mechizedek by water immersion and being anointed with holy spirit. First the natural (type/shadow), then the spiritual (anti-type/reality)

 

[Musicmaster]

Baptism was also a prerequisite procedural part of taking up one's priestly duties .

Jesus was becoming our great new high priest, and we likewise become
priests through Him who called us out of darkness into His marvelous light.

Do you have a link to that? I'd like to read up a little more on it.

MM

 

[Musicmaster]

My dear brother in Christ, those Jews you reference about washed externally only,, yes.,,, however....it was not "their faith" that was demonstrated at the Jordon. And John did not prepare the way for "at least some" through their own understanding.. ??
You are missing the mark pretty big on the work of John the Baptist and what God spoke about though both prophets Isaiah and Ezekiel.

I thought that I also made it clear in my post that the PRACTICE of baptism was not at all strange to the Jews. I did not delve deeply into the implications and all the potential spiritual verses physical dynamics of each segment of baptism within the various historic practices.

It's a given that baptism by water does nothing in relation to solidifying salvation for anyone...that I will agree with, but I don't understand the corrective nature of your post because, as stated, I was not yet delving into all the purely religious, traditional and pseudo-spiritual argumentation that I'm sure many would love to engage in all this, with which I have no interest.

MM

 

[Magenta]

Do you have a link to that? I'd like to read up a little more on it.

MM

You will find the commandments given in Exodus 29:4-6 and also in Leviticus chapter 8:5-6. Hebrews chapter 9 verse 10 says of these special washings that they were external regulations imposed until the time of reform or a time of reformation (translation differences). In this way Jesus was fulfilling all righteousness by submitting Himself to the ritual of water baptism before taking up His priestly duties.

 

[JMH]

I thought that I also made it clear in my post that the PRACTICE of baptism was not at all strange to the Jews. I did not delve deeply into the implications and all the potential spiritual verses physical dynamics of each segment of baptism within the various historic practices.

It's a given that baptism by water does nothing in relation to solidifying salvation for anyone...that I will agree with, but I don't understand the corrective nature of your post because, as stated, I was not yet delving into all the purely religious, traditional and pseudo-spiritual argumentation that I'm sure many would love to engage in all this, with which I have no interest.

MM

Your History looks fine but the Theology you are mentioning is not. You said it was a "demonstration of their faith"... was it really?

 

[Musicmaster]

Your History looks fine but the Theology you are mentioning is not. You said it was a "demonstration of their faith"... was it really?

My short take on it was that, for them to allow John to baptize them, they had to believe his message, and that by faith, they were obedient to the message John preached, which was repentance and the Kingdom being at hand:

Matthew 3:1-2
1 In those days came John the Baptist, preaching in the wilderness of Judaea,
2 And saying, Repent ye: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.

Is it not reasonable that the Jews who were being baptized, which may have also included proselytes, were baptized by John out of faith, for if they did not believe in his message, then why else would they have been baptized?

This is the crux of what's confusing about your initial response to my OP. I'm just trying to understand what your beef is with it.

MM

 

[JMH]

My short take on it was that, for them to allow John to baptize them, they had to believe his message, and that by faith, they were obedient to the message John preached, which was repentance and the Kingdom being at hand:

Matthew 3:1-2
1 In those days came John the Baptist, preaching in the wilderness of Judaea,
2 And saying, Repent ye: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.

Is it not reasonable that the Jews who were being baptized, which may have also included proselytes, were baptized by John out of faith, for if they did not believe in his message, then why else would they have been baptized?

This is the crux of what's confusing about your initial response to my OP. I'm just trying to understand what your beef is with it.

MM

It was never their faith to begin with brother. John was a type and shadow of what God himself was going to do. To get this better, do you believe John was Baptizing in OT or NT times? Curious for you response..

 

[Musicmaster]

It was never their faith to begin with brother. John was a type and shadow of what God himself was going to do. To get this better, do you believe John was Baptizing in OT or NT times? Curious for you response..

You did not answer my question, which leads to the fact that we are both, then arguing from silence. So, to get past this I will go on to other of what you stated in this quote. To say that John was a type and shadow, where is that stated or intimated within the texts? He was indeed a real, physical man for he was executed by beheading, as the text states.

Also, the artificial separation various groups draw through the scriptures to place that mark where they so desire as a separation between old and new testaments, let's look at what Jesus said:

Luke 22:20 Likewise also the cup after supper, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood, which is shed for you.

1 Corinthians 11:25 After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink [it], in remembrance of me.

Notice that Jesus did not point at anything else, such as the cross, the tomb or anything else as the object for the ushering in of the new testament, but only that cup, with His Blood as the following consummation of what that cup was meant to be.

Is this what you're talking about? I ask because ALL of scripture points to Christ Jesus, from Genesis through Revelation, and so the divisions anyone may point at as to what is relevant for us today and what is not, many erroneously end up dabbling in allegorizing key passages of scripture to try and make them say whatever they want them to say, which is...error. As a systematic theologian, I do not subscribe to that departure from the words of Christ, His apostles and His prophets. As an Israeli I cannot possibly give credence to manipulative allegorizations. I'm not saying that's what you are doing, but there are many out there who do, so I simply wanted to head that off at the pass...so to speak.

MM

 

[JMH]

You did not answer my question, which leads to the fact that we are both, then arguing from silence. So, to get past this I will go on to other of what you stated in this quote. To say that John was a type and shadow, where is that stated or intimated within the texts? He was indeed a real, physical man for he was executed by beheading, as the text states.

Also, the artificial separation various groups draw through the scriptures to place that mark where they so desire as a separation between old and new testaments, let's look at what Jesus said:

Luke 22:20 Likewise also the cup after supper, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood, which is shed for you.

1 Corinthians 11:25 After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink [it], in remembrance of me.

Notice that Jesus did not point at anything else, such as the cross, the tomb or anything else as the object for the ushering in of the new testament, but only that cup, with His Blood as the following consummation of what that cup was meant to be.

Is this what you're talking about? I ask because ALL of scripture points to Christ Jesus, from Genesis through Revelation, and so the divisions anyone may point at as to what is relevant for us today and what is not, many erroneously end up dabbling in allegorizing key passages of scripture to try and make them say whatever they want them to say, which is...error. As a systematic theologian, I do not subscribe to that departure from the words of Christ, His apostles and His prophets. As an Israeli I cannot possibly give credence to manipulative allegorizations. I'm not saying that's what you are doing, but there are many out there who do, so I simply wanted to head that off at the pass...so to speak.

MM

Brother, John was an OT prophet and Jesus ministry came in the time of OT, i am sure you won't argue that, hence why there was baptism of repentance going on with John at the Jordon that no longer occurred once we get into Acts, correct??? I never once said anything about Jesus and the shedding of His blood, i only spoke about repentance and error in your theology. nothing wrong with someone trying to help someone, God bless.

 

[Musicmaster]

Brother, John was an OT prophet and Jesus ministry came in the time of OT, i am sure you won't argue that, hence why there was baptism of repentance going on with John at the Jordon that no longer occurred once we get into Acts, correct??? I never once said anything about Jesus and the shedding of His blood, i only spoke about repentance and error in your theology. nothing wrong with someone trying to help someone, God bless.

Well, let's look at that, shall we:

Acts 2:37-38
37 Now when they heard [this], they were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men and brethren, what shall we do?
38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.

The only new elements in the same Gospel of the Kingdom by the time of Pentecost is the name of Jesus Christ and water baptism unto the remission of sins. That is not the Gospel of Grace, under which we are today. Paul never commanded baptism for remission of sins.

Peter spoke what was meant FOR those people at that time. Paul, the apostle unto the Gentiles, to whom the mystery hidden in God since the foundation of the world, stated what Gospel is for us today, and it did not include the element of water baptism.

Generally speaking, many like to inject meaning into the places where we find the term "baptism" in order to try and make various texts say what they want them to say, and I personally avoid that manipulative nonsense that's so common among Gentile converts who don't know the scriptures for what they say.

MM

 

[ChristRoseFromTheDead]

Peter spoke what was meant FOR those people at that time. Paul, the apostle unto the Gentiles, to whom the mystery hidden in God since the foundation of the world, stated what Gospel is for us today, and it did not include the element of water baptism.

How can you speak with such certainty when you don't even know what scripture says? Paul did indeed water baptize when he proclaimed the gospel.

And a certain woman named Lydia, a seller of purple, of the city of Thyatira, which worshipped God, heard us: whose heart the Lord opened, that she attended unto the things which were spoken of Paul. And when she was baptized, and her household, she besought us, saying, If ye have judged me to be faithful to the Lord, come into my house, and abide there. And she constrained us. Acts 16:14-15​

​

Then [the jailer] called for a light, and sprang in, and came trembling, and fell down before Paul and Silas, And brought them out, and said, Sirs, what must I do to be saved? And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house. And they spake unto him the word of the Lord, and to all that were in his house. And he took them the same hour of the night, and washed their stripes; and was baptized, he and all his house, straightway. Acts 16:29-33​

​

And [Paul] departed thence, and entered into a certain man's house, named Justus, one that worshipped God, whose house joined hard to the synagogue. And Crispus, the chief ruler of the synagogue, believed on the Lord with all his house; and many of the Corinthians hearing believed, and were baptized. Acts 18:7-8​

​

Then said Paul, John verily baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying unto the people, that they should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus. When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. Acts 19:4-5​

​

​

 

[homwardbound]

Ephesians 4:5
one Lord, one faith, one baptism,

Which one spoken of saves? Water or Spirit?
Water for repentance to change ones mind, to believe God, to go (grow) forth and do as best anyone can, being willing and accountable to God personally, not caring to harm anyone ever again, seeks willingly to learn from God Father of in risen Son Jesus. oR love as are loved by God through Son at that cross for to cross over with Father and Son, from continued steadfast belief.
then comes the Spirit of God the Father of Jesus the Holy Spirit and engulf's people (Born new, a gift given)
Then the corruptible in flesh nature becomes incorruptible, death is swallowed up in victory

Water is the beginning of wanting to do right, one is claiming they believe God or has a different motive, God knows, and I rest in that God knows, in thanksgiving and praise. Trusting Father knows what is going on in each and everyone of us people, and I trust God will decide, not me or anyone else.

Spirit Baptism comes from Father to any person Father sees as serious, sincere and not out for the self or just those they love, truly care for us all. That being that motive for me is well for my soul, as well as all others, look at Solomon, not perfect yet only wanted wisdom to direct the people correctly.
Today it seems many want it for controlling, the tis not well for me to want that, hoping none of you either.
One Baptism! true Baptism of the Spirit of Father in risen Son changes anyone from inside out, has and does that for me. Amazing to see and be enveloped by God's love of 1 Cor 13:4-7
Thanks for the Post MM