The Highway Forums General Discussion Theology Discussion Forum My first question?

xyz said:


He recognized that Jesus was a person who had no need for repentance. He testified that he did not know who Jesus was until the sign given at the baptism.



The text does not say so, but even if it was necessary then, it does not mean that it would always be so. There is no general command for water baptism anywhere in Scripture.

That is not in Scripture. Scripture says that, to be saved, one must believe and witness to one's belief with one's mouth. That witness can be at water baptism, but witness must be a continuing fruit of the Spirit until death or Christ's return.

In view of the fact that water baptism became to great extent the next circumcision, a work vainly put towards justification, the saints may decide to omit this now empty ritual. John's riposte to the Pharisees and Sadducees lost no relevance for other pretenders in the post-apostolic period and beyond.


Water baptism is nowhere entailed under Mosaic Law. Had it been, John would not have turned away, not just Jesus, but teachers of the Law!

xyz said:
The first of these is a general command, but does not mention water;

xyz then said:
the next two are not general commands;

lastly xyz said:
the last is not command. The fact that Paul baptized so remarkably few is indication of his own view of its importance.

In response to Wes saying:you replied:
He recognized that Jesus was a person who had no need for repentance.

In response to my asking:you replied:
Only when he thought they needed to repent, and intended to repent.

In response to my saying:you replied:How is it known that this case was unique?

For this is he who was spoken of by the prophet Isaiah when he said,
"The voice of one crying in the wilderness: 'Prepare the way of the Lord*;
make his* paths straight.'"
::
"I baptize you with water for repentance, but he* who is coming after me is mightier than I, whose* sandals I am not worthy to carry. He* will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire. His* winnowing fork is in his hand, and he* will clear his* threshing floor and gather his* wheat into the barn, but the chaff he* will burn with unquenchable fire." (Matthew 3:3,11-12 ESV)

* the Lord/he/his/whose--all referring to a singular, ie unique, person (I know you are sensitive to the usage of pronouns and the like)
****************************
As it is written in Isaiah the prophet,

"Behold, I send my messenger before your* face,
who will prepare your* way,
the voice of one crying in the wilderness:
'Prepare the way of the Lord*,
make his* paths straight,'"
::
And he preached, saying, "After me comes he* who is mightier than I, the strap of whose* sandals I am not worthy to stoop down and untie. I have baptized you with water, but he* will baptize you with the Holy Spirit." (Mark 1:2-3,7-8 ESV)

* your/ the Lord/ his/he--all referring to a singular, ie unique, person
****************************
And you, child, will be called the prophet of the Most High;
for you will go before the Lord* to prepare his* ways
::
John answered them all, saying, "I baptize you with water, but he* who is* mightier than I is* coming, the strap of whose* sandals I am not worthy to untie. He* will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and with fire. His* winnowing fork is in his hand, to clear his* threshing floor and to gather the wheat into his* barn, but the chaff he* will burn with unquenchable fire." (Luke 1:76, 3:16-17, ESV)

* the Lord/ his/he/is/whose--all referring to a singular, ie unique, person
********************************
He came as a witness, to bear witness about the light*, that all might believe through him*. He was not the light, but came to bear witness about the light*.
::
( John bore witness about him*, and cried out, "This* was* he* of whom* I said, 'He* who comes after me ranks* before me, because he* was* before me.'")
::
He said, "I am the voice of one crying out in the wilderness, 'Make straight the way of the Lord,'* as the prophet Isaiah said."
::
John answered them, "I baptize with water, but among you stands* one* you do not know, even he* who comes* after me, the strap of whose* sandal I am not worthy to untie."
::
The next day he saw Jesus coming toward him, and said, "Behold, the Lamb of God*, who* takes* away the sin of the world! This is he* of whom* I said, 'After me comes a man* who ranks* before me, because he* was* before me.' I myself did not know him*, but for this purpose I came baptizing with water, that he* might be revealed to Israel." And John bore witness: "I saw the Spirit descend from heaven like a dove, and it remained on him*. I myself did not know him*, but he who sent me to baptize with water said to me, 'He* on whom you see the Spirit descend and remain, this* is* he* who* baptizes* with the Holy Spirit.' And I have seen and have borne witness that this* is* the Son of God*."
The next day again John was standing with two of his disciples, and he looked at Jesus as he walked by and said, "Behold, the Lamb of God!"* (John 1:7-8,15,23,26-27,29-36 ESV)

* the light/him/this/was/he/whom/ranks/the Lord/stands/one/comes/whose/the Lamb of God/who/ takes/a man/is/baptizes/the Son of God--all referring to a singular, ie unique, person

Pilgrim said:
Then pray tell, what was the medium to be used by the disciples to baptize those who came to faith since they were incapable of baptizing them with the Holy Spirit

xyz then said:
the next two are not general commands;

The second one is indisputably a command. But you evidently don't see the preaching of Peter to be paradigmatic? Thus neither the content of his message (repent and believe upon Christ) and then to be "baptized for the remission of sins" is to be done today? <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/shrug.gif" alt="" />

lastly xyz said:
the last is not command. The fact that Paul baptized so remarkably few is indication of his own view of its importance.

CONTEXT, CONTEXT, CONTEXT . . . how that idea is so easily dismissed by many today. The text makes clear that ALL the saints he was addressing were, in fact, baptized albeit by others and not Paul himself with the exceptions mentioned. The point he was addressing was the tendency of some to follow after a man (idolatry) and not after Christ alone.

xyz said:

The word matheeteúsate means 'make disciples by teaching'. That is how rabbis made disciples for themselves, but here conversion was to be on behalf of, in the name of, the deity, Father, Son and Spirit, no less. It is gospel teaching that baptizes 'with fire', i.e. spiritually, not by physical means. The context is one of authority, Jesus having been given 'all power in heaven and on earth'.

xyz then said:
By being baptized in water, the converts were 'pinning their colors to the mast', making open declaration of allegiance to their Master. Today, water baptizm signifies very little- but public personal oral testimony of what Jesus has done for individuals does signify, though. That is used by some as the practical indication of conversion before men (along with personal fruits)- while not prohibiting water baptizm, the practise of which is a personal decision.

lastly xyz said:
That is his main point, agreed, but in reinforcing it, he indicates that water baptizm, even though likely to be commonly practised, is not a principle concern of his. Paul became 'father' to the Corinthians through the gospel, i.e. he 'baptized' them in the Holy Spirit, yet he baptized only a few of them in water.