My first question? - The Highway

Please, let me start by saying that I am trying to understand Christianity in general and that I do not wish to ever suggest or imply that your faith is in error when I post questions. If, at any time, I write anything that is improper or offensive, please let me know that I have stepped out of bounds!
One of the several reasons that Jews reject Jesus as the Messiah is that it is claimed that He is without sin, yet he was baptised. Could someone explain why that was necessary? TIA
Patty

Matthew 3:13-17 says:

Quote

13 Then Jesus arrived from Galilee at the Jordan coming to John, to be baptized by him.
14 But John tried to prevent Him, saying, "I have need to be baptized by You, and do You come to me?"
15 But Jesus answering said to him, "Permit it at this time; for in this way it is fitting for us to fulfill all righteousness." Then he permitted Him.
16 After being baptized, Jesus came up immediately from the water; and behold, the heavens were opened, and he saw the Spirit of God descending as a dove and lighting on Him,
17 and behold, a voice out of the heavens said, "This is My beloved Son, in whom I am well-pleased."

John himself at first questioned Jesus' need to be baptized. But Jesus said it must be done to fulfill all righteousness. In other words, if Jesus had NOT been baptized, He would not have been perfect!

I am still not understanding. He wasn't perfect before that point in time? I guess I am not understanding the "fulfill all righteousness".
Thank you for responding!

Quote

plt said:
I am still not understanding. He wasn't perfect before that point in time? . . .

Thank you for responding!

Matthew 3:16 And Jesus, when he was baptized, went up straightway out of the water: and, lo, the heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove, and lighting upon him:

Yes, Jesus was sinless at the time of His baptism. The Holy Spirit had always dwelt in Jesus but at baptism He was endued with the Holy Spirit in a remarkable and extraordinary manner[color:"0000FF"] "to bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to them that are bound".[/color]

[color:"0000FF"]Isaiah 61:1 ¶ The Spirit of the Lord GOD is upon me; because the LORD hath anointed me to preach good tidings unto the meek; he hath sent me to bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to them that are bound;

Isaiah 11:2 And the spirit of the LORD shall rest upon him, the spirit of wisdom and understanding, the spirit of counsel and might, the spirit of knowledge and of the fear of the LORD;

Isaiah 42:1 ¶ Behold my servant, whom I uphold; mine elect, in whom my soul delighteth; I have put my spirit upon him: he shall bring forth judgment to the Gentiles.
[/color]

.

Yes, Christ was perfect before this time. The Law of God not only forbids us from doing certain, but it commands us to do certain things. That is why we cannot live up to God's standard...as the Psalmist said, "I have seen a limit to all perfection; Your commandment is exceedingly broad" (119:96).

Why did Christ fulfill all righteousness?

Isaiah explains for us:

Quote

4 Surely our griefs He Himself bore,
And our sorrows He carried;
Yet we ourselves esteemed Him stricken,
Smitten of God, and afflicted.
5 But He was pierced through for our transgressions,
He was crushed for our iniquities;
The chastening for our well-being fell upon Him,
And by His scourging we are healed.
6 All of us like sheep have gone astray,
Each of us has turned to his own way;
But the LORD has caused the iniquity of us all
To fall on Him.
7 He was oppressed and He was afflicted,
Yet He did not open His mouth;
Like a lamb that is led to slaughter,
And like a sheep that is silent before its shearers,
So He did not open His mouth.
8 By oppression and judgment He was taken away;
And as for His generation, who considered
That He was cut off out of the land of the living
For the transgression of my people, to whom the stroke was due?
9 His grave was assigned with wicked men,
Yet He was with a rich man in His death,
Because He had done no violence,
Nor was there any deceit in His mouth.
10 But the LORD was pleased
To crush Him, putting Him to grief;
If He would render Himself as a guilt offering,
He will see His offspring,
He will prolong His days,
And the good pleasure of the LORD will prosper in His hand.
11As a result of the anguish of His soul,
He will see it and be satisfied;
By His knowledge the Righteous One,
My Servant, will justify the many,
As He will bear their iniquities.
12 Therefore, I will allot Him a portion with the great,
And He will divide the booty with the strong;
Because He poured out Himself to death,
And was numbered with the transgressors;
Yet He Himself bore the sin of many,
And interceded for the transgressors (53:4-12).

It was so the many would be justified. While here the sacrificial aspects are highlighted, Isaiah elsewhere says:

Quote

10 I will rejoice greatly in the LORD,
My soul will exult in my God;
For He has clothed me with garments of salvation,
He has wrapped me with a robe of righteousness,
As a bridegroom decks himself with a garland,
And as a bride adorns herself with her jewels.
11 For as the earth brings forth its sprouts,
And as a garden causes the things sown in it to spring up,
So the Lord GOD will cause righteousness and praise
To spring up before all the nations (61:10-11).

Jeremiah also says that, in the days of the Messiah, the saved will call God by the name "The LORD our righteousness" (23:6, 33:16).

I love Isaiah! I will show you the same passage in my bible, it does read a bit differently. Thank you for the responses. I am understanding (slowly but surely!)
Isaiah 53
JPS Tanakh

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 'Who would have believed our report? And to whom hath the arm of the LORD been revealed?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2 For he shot up right forth as a sapling, and as a root out of a dry ground; he had no form nor comeliness, that we should look upon him, nor beauty that we should delight in him.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3 He was despised, and forsaken of men, a man of pains, and acquainted with disease, and as one from whom men hide their face: he was despised, and we esteemed him not.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4 Surely our diseases he did bear, and our pains he carried; whereas we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
5 But he was wounded because of our transgressions, he was crushed because of our iniquities: the chastisement of our welfare was upon him, and with his stripes we were healed.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
6 All we like sheep did go astray, we turned every one to his own way; and the LORD hath made to light on him the iniquity of us all.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
7 He was oppressed, though he humbled himself and opened not his mouth; as a lamb that is led to the slaughter, and as a sheep that before her shearers is dumb; yea, he opened not his mouth.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
8 By oppression and judgment he was taken away, and with his generation who did reason? for he was cut off out of the land of the living, for the transgression of my people to whom the stroke was due.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
9 And they made his grave with the wicked, and with the rich his tomb; although he had done no violence, neither was any deceit in his mouth.'
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
10 Yet it pleased the LORD to crush him by disease; to see if his soul would offer itself in restitution, that he might see his seed, prolong his days, and that the purpose of the LORD might prosper by his hand:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
11 Of the travail of his soul he shall see to the full, even My servant, who by his knowledge did justify the Righteous One to the many, and their iniquities he did bear.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
12 Therefore will I divide him a portion among the great, and he shall divide the spoil with the mighty; because he bared his soul unto death, and was numbered with the transgressors; yet he bore the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors.

That is not that different than the text in my Bible. How would you interpret Isaiah here?

I know that Christians interpret these verses as fortelling the coming of the Messiah. Jewish interpretation can best be explained at this link: http://www.jewsforjudaism.org/web/faq/faq136.html
I will let them interpret for me as I am not very good at these kinds of things. Plus this site explains the believed Christian mistranslations as well.

Quote

plt said:
Please, let me start by saying that I am trying to understand Christianity in general and that I do not wish to ever suggest or imply that your faith is in error when I post questions. If, at any time, I write anything that is improper or offensive, please let me know that I have stepped out of bounds!
One of the several reasons that Jews reject Jesus as the Messiah is that it is claimed that He is without sin, yet he was baptised. Could someone explain why that was necessary? TIA
Patty

Hi Patty,

Jesus was sinless, that is true, and John the Baptist recognized it. When Jesus came to John to be baptized, John said, "I have need to be baptized by You, and do You come to me?" John objected because baptism signifies purification from sin, but Jesus needed no such purification. However, Jesus answered, "Permit it at this time; for in this way it is fitting for us to fulfill all righteousness" (Matt. 3:14-15). What was His intention?

Let us first consider what happened in Jesus' baptism. Matthew writes, "After being baptized, Jesus came up immediately from the water; and behold, the heavens were opened, and he saw the Spirit of God descending as a dove and lighting on Him, and behold, a voice out of the heavens said, 'This is My beloved Son, in whom I am well-pleased'" (Matt. 3:16-17; cf. Mark 1:10-11, Luke 3:20-22, John 1:32-34).

Two things here. First, in His baptism, Jesus received the anointing of the Holy Spirit in full measure, to strengthen Him as He began His gospel ministry. With the power of the Spirit, Jesus would resist Satan's temptations in the wilderness, preach the Word of God with power and authority, cast out demons and heal the sick, endure the terrible suffering of the cross, and rise from the dead. Second, this anointing was from God, who declared publicly that Jesus was His chosen Messiah (Anointed One): "This is My beloved Son, in whom I am well-pleased."

Quote

<p align="center">from Psalm 2

[1] Why are the nations in an uproar
And the peoples devising a vain thing?
[2] The kings of the earth take their stand
And the rulers take counsel together
Against the LORD and against His Anointed, saying,
[3] "Let us tear their fetters apart
And cast away their cords from us!"

[4] He who sits in the heavens laughs,
The Lord scoffs at them.
[5] Then He will speak to them in His anger
And terrify them in His fury, saying,
[6] "But as for Me, I have installed My King
Upon Zion, My holy mountain."

[7] "I will surely tell of the decree of the LORD:
He said to Me, 'You are My Son,
Today have I begotten You.
[8] 'Ask of Me, and I will surely give the nations as Your inheritance,
And the very ends of the earth as Your possession.
[9] 'You shall break them with a rod of iron,
You shall shatter them like earthenware.'"

So, Jesus was baptized to be filled with the Holy Spirit, and to be declared publicly as the Messiah. However, there is more. The height of Jesus' messianic ministry is His death on the cross. In His baptism, Jesus was confirming His calling and commitment to be "the Lamb of God which taketh away the sin of the world" (John 1:29). Commenting on Matthew, William Hendriksen writes,

Quote

It was right that he who had promised to offer himself as a ransom for many ratify this promise by means of submitting to baptism, thereby reaffirming his desire and decision to take upon himself the sin of the world. The water of baptism signifies and seals the washing away of sin, and Jesus by means of this sacrament reveals himself as the Sin-bearer.

In His baptism, Jesus was identifying Himself with the sinners He came to save. Their sins and uncleanness were imputed to Him, and He defeated and destroyed their sins by His death on the cross, rising again the third day in victory. "Therefore we have been buried with Him through baptism into death, so that as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, so we too might walk in newness of life" (Rom. 6:4).

I hope you find this helpful!

Patty,

In response to your question concerning the necessity of baptism for Jesus, which was answered by Marie and Kyle above, here is a link to a more extended explanation: John Calvin's commentary on Matthew 3:13-17.

Your question gets to the heart of the matter, because Jesus, in his baptism no less than in his birth, circumcision, life, temptation, condemnation, death, burial and resurrection--in short, his entire life as a man in every respect--came to impute his entire righteousness to the credit of all who believe on him.

The world, and any "world religion" which attempts to craft a righteousness with which to be justified before God, in so doing declares the real, imputed righteousness of Jesus Christ to be dung, but God is not mocked. We urge you to become as Adam and Eve, who crafted bloodless coverings for themselves but were unrighteous in God's sight until he clothed them with bloody skins of an animal slain in their place; the Lamb of God now covers with his own perfect righteousness all who believe on him.

Thank you. These are excellent explanations regarding my questions and I appreciate you taking time to answer them so completely. These are exactly the responses I was looking for. I am slowly expanding my knowledge and comprehension about the Christian religion. As a Jew, I was often given statements about "what" Christians believe but rarely about "why" they believe it. You are very kind to help me expand my knowledge (and being patient in the process).

-----

The best person to answer the first posters question is Jesus, the author of our faith (the Word of God)...Heb 12:2 Jesus himself answers your question as to "why" he was baptized at Matthew 3:15. He's teaching us by example to 'fulfill all righteousness'. But remember, baptism doesn't signify a putting away of the filthiness of the flesh, but the answer of a right conscience before God. 1 Pet 3:21

-----

Quote

plt said:
One of the several reasons that Jews reject Jesus as the Messiah is that it is claimed that He is without sin, yet he was baptised. Could someone explain why that was necessary?

What would have happened if Jesus had not been baptised? People could have thought three erroneous things. One, that Jesus proudly thought himself better than others. Two, that Jesus thought that baptism for repentance was unnecessary for anyone. Three, that Jesus for some reason disapproved of John.

We must remember that, at the time, few people knew who Jesus was. We must remember that he did not even want people to recognise him on account of his own claim. He referred to himself as 'the son of man' (which we, with hindsight, write as 'the Son of Man'). It was after he had decided to be baptised, after he had been willing to be seen to be the sinner he was not, that there was glory and recognition given to him by supernal means.

Quote

xyz said:
What would have happened if Jesus had not been baptised? People could have thought three erroneous things. One, that Jesus proudly thought himself better than others. Two, that Jesus thought that baptism for repentance was unnecessary for anyone. Three, that Jesus for some reason disapproved of John.

We must remember that, at the time, few people knew who Jesus was. We must remember that he did not even want people to recognise him on account of his own claim. He referred to himself as 'the son of man' (which we, with hindsight, write as 'the Son of Man'). It was after he had decided to be baptised, after he had been willing to be seen to be the sinner he was not, that there was glory and recognition given to him by supernal means.

Never was going to happen Jesus was going to be baptized to accomplish the will of the Father, God had commanded all Jews to be baptized (Matt 13:15) and so Jesus came to be baptized. There is no room for such crass speculation that you suggest xyz.

Quote

Boanerges said:

Quote

xyz said:
What would have happened if Jesus had not been baptised? People could have thought three erroneous things. One, that Jesus proudly thought himself better than others. Two, that Jesus thought that baptism for repentance was unnecessary for anyone. Three, that Jesus for some reason disapproved of John.

We must remember that, at the time, few people knew who Jesus was. We must remember that he did not even want people to recognise him on account of his own claim. He referred to himself as 'the son of man' (which we, with hindsight, write as 'the Son of Man'). It was after he had decided to be baptised, after he had been willing to be seen to be the sinner he was not, that there was glory and recognition given to him by supernal means.

Never was going to happen Jesus was going to be baptized to accomplish the will of the Father, God had commanded all Jews to be baptized (Matt 13:15)

That verse does not mention baptism. If Mt 3:15 is intended, that has no command for baptism. Even if there was command for Jews to be baptised, it could not necessarily be extended to Gentiles. There is no general command for water baptism in Scripture, and there was no need for Jesus to be baptised, either to fulfil the Law or for any other reason than those given. John indeed tried to persuade Jesus to actually desist.

The reason for Jesus' baptism is not that it is a model for his disciples to be water baptised, as is so often supposed. The reason was that Jesus, unlike Job, was willing to be thought a sinner when he was not, and for that received divine approval. This willingness was to recur throughout His ministry, and to the ultimate extent possible, on the cross, where the ultimate 'reward' for the Christ was to be won. Jesus' baptism was an inkling of what was to follow. If there is example in this for the saints, it is to be willing to endure false accusation, to 'carry one's cross', which comes to all who would follow Jesus.

The witness of John the B. is mentioned in 1 Jn 5, where in verse 6 we read:

'This is the one who came by water and blood — Jesus Christ. He did not come by water only, but by water and blood. And it is the Spirit who testifies, because the Spirit is the truth.' (NIV)

'A matter will be established by two or three witnesses.' God provides not two, but three witnesses to the Son. Here is John's witness:

'I myself did not know him, but the reason I came baptising with water was that he might be revealed to Israel." Then John gave this testimony: "I saw the Spirit come down from heaven as a dove and remain on him. I would not have known him, except that the one who sent me to baptise with water told me, 'The man on whom you see the Spirit come down and remain is he who will baptise with the Holy Spirit.' I have seen and I testify that this is the Son of God."' Jn 1:31-34 NIV

So the water of His baptism 'announced' Jesus as the innocent Lamb of God, the blood of the cross 'confirmed' it, and the Holy Spirit 'draws all men' to Jesus, even though most reject Him, because the Spirit convicts them of their sin, of Jesus' righteousness, and of the judgement that operates in their minds even as they reject Him.

1. Matt 3:15 was the intended verse not Matt 13:15 my fat fingers and this notebook computer doesn't always mesh well.

2. In response to your original statement:

Quote

[color:"FF0000"]What would have happened if Jesus had not been baptised? (sic)[/color]

My reply was that Jesus had to be baptized because it was a requirement of God to Israel, as Christ, Jesus was to fulfill all that was required of Israel. So he had to be baptized. There was no other option.

3. Your comment here:

Quote

[color:"FF0000"]The reason for Jesus' baptism is not that it is a model for his disciples to be water baptised, as is so often supposed. The reason was that Jesus, unlike Job, was willing to be thought a sinner when he was not, and for that received divine approval. This willingness was to recur throughout His ministry, and to the ultimate extent possible, on the cross, where the ultimate 'reward' for the Christ was to be won. Jesus' baptism was an inkling of what was to follow. If there is example in this for the saints, it is to be willing to endure false accusation, to 'carry one's cross', which comes to all who would follow Jesus. [/color]

Is totally out of left field, where you appear to be getting most of your hermeneutics, unless you were trying for the allegorical/gnostic version of exegesis?

Main point: Jesus had to be baptized to fulfill all righteousness to suggest otherwise is to ignore what the Bible clearly teaches.

Quote

Boanerges said:

Jesus had to be baptized because it was a requirement of God to Israel

Can we have chapter and verse, please?

Quote

xyz said:

Quote

Boanerges said:

Jesus had to be baptized because it was a requirement of God to Israel

Can we have chapter and verse, please?

Matthew 3:13-17 (NKJV)

John Baptizes Jesus

13 Then Jesus came from Galilee to John at the Jordan to be baptized by him. 14 And John tried to prevent Him, saying, “I need to be baptized by You, and are You coming to me?”
15 But Jesus answered and said to him, “Permit it to be so now, for thus it is fitting for us to fulfill all righteousness.” Then he allowed Him.
16 When He had been baptized, Jesus came up immediately from the water; and behold, the heavens were opened to Him, and He[a] saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove and alighting upon Him. 17 And suddenly a voice came from heaven, saying, “This is My beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.”

John was reluctant to baptize Jesus because he recognized that Jesus was the person who had no need for repentance. But in order for "all righteousness" to be fulfilled, Jesus had to be identified with His people as the bearer of their sins (2 Cor.5:21). Ultimately John's baptism pointed to Jesus, for only Jesus' death on the cross, which He called a "baptism" (Luke 12:50), could take away sins. Jesus' identification with His people included His baptism and death, His anointment with the Spirit, and His victory over temptation.

There is continuity between John's baptism of repentance (Mark 1:4) and the trinitarian baptism instituted by Jesus (Matt. 28:19). Both were symbols of cleansing, and had remission of sins in view (Mark1:4; Acts 2:38). But they were not identical.
Those baptized by John needed Christian baptism as well (Acts 19:5). Christian baptism is a sign of initiation pointing to a relatonship with the Christ who has come; John baptism was a preparatory rite, signifying readiness for the coming of Christ and His judgment (Matt. 3:7-12; Luke 3:7-18; Acts 19:4).

Jesus insisted that John, His cousin, must baptize Him, overriding John's protests (Matt. 3:13-15. In His role as Messiah, "born under the law" (Gal.4:4), Jesus had to submit to all God's requirements for Israel, and identify with those whose sins He had come to bear. His baptism proclaimed that He had come to take the sinner's place under God's judgment. It is in this sense that He was baptized to "fulfill all righteousness" (Matt. 3:15 cf. Is.53:11).

Wes

Quote

xyz asks:Can we have chapter and verse, please?

John's preparatory baptismal ministry, to which Wes referred you* above, was publicly and explicitly mandated by God:

Quote

...he will be filled with the Holy Spirit, even from his mother’s womb. And he will turn many of the children of Israel to the Lord their God, and he will go before him in the spirit and power of Elijah, to turn the hearts of the fathers to the children, and the disobedient to the wisdom of the just, to make ready for the Lord a people prepared." (Luke 1:15-17, ESV)
::
In the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar, Pontius Pilate being governor of Judea, and Herod being tetrarch of Galilee, and his brother Philip tetrarch of the region of Ituraea and Trachonitis, and Lysanias tetrarch of Abilene, during the high priesthood of Annas and Caiaphas, the word of God came to John the son of Zechariah in the wilderness. And he went into all the region around the Jordan, proclaiming a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins. As it is written in the book of the words of Isaiah the prophet,

"The voice of one crying in the wilderness: 'Prepare the way of the Lord, make his paths straight.
Every valley shall be filled,
and every mountain and hill shall be made low,
and the crooked shall become straight,
and the rough places shall become level ways,
and all flesh shall see the salvation of God.'" (Luke 3:1-6)

Please note again the clear calling of John by the angel of the Lord, by the word of God, in the Holy Spirit, both from birth and at the outset of his ministry, to do exactly what he did, that is, call all Israel to repentance.

* And yes, people do use direct 2nd-person references with some frequency here, since most of these posts are not a "civil debate" at all, but rather an attempt to encourage and exhort real, individual people to find, turn to, or return to, or not turn away from, the faith once delivered to the saints.

xyz Wes has so kindly fulfilled your request. Very considerate Wes, thank you. Now do you understand Jesus had to be baptized there was no option to do otherwise.

Quote

Wes said:

John was reluctant to baptize Jesus because he recognized that Jesus was the person who had no need for repentance.

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.

Quote

Those baptized by John needed Christian baptism as well (Acts 19:5).

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.

Quote

Christian baptism is a sign of initiation pointing to a relatonship with the Christ who has come

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.

Quote

In His role as Messiah, "born under the law" (Gal.4:4), Jesus had to submit to all God's requirements for Israel

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!

Quote

Paul_S said:
Please note again the clear calling of John by the angel of the Lord, by the word of God, in the Holy Spirit, both from birth and at the outset of his ministry, to do exactly what he did, that is, call all Israel to repentance.

A call to repentance is not command for baptism.

Quote

xyz said:
There is no general command for water baptism anywhere in Scripture.

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.

xyz,

Strange how all my English translations of the Bible and both my Greek texts (Westcott-Hort and TR) all have myriad passages which specifically state that believers+ are to be baptized. Whereas you may not be using the same reference material, I'll provide just a few of those passages for your benefit below:

Matthew 28:19 (ASV) "Go ye therefore, and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them into the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit:"

Acts 2:38 (ASV) "And Peter [said] unto them, Repent ye, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ unto the remission of your sins; and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit."

Acts 10:48 (ASV) "And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. Then prayed they him to tarry certain days."

1 Corinthians 1:12-16 (ASV) "Now this I mean, that each one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos: and I of Cephas; and I of Christ. Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized into the name of Paul? I thank God that I baptized none of you, save Crispus and Gaius; lest any man should say that ye were baptized into my name. And I baptized also the household of Stephanas: besides, I know not whether I baptized any other." (the passage undeniably implies that Christian baptism was universally practiced and is assumed here by Paul)

Secondly, I cannot understand your description of baptism as a "now empty ritual"?

The covenant sign of baptism, which replaced the covenant sign of circumcision (cf. Col 2:11, 12) is hardly an "empty ritual" but contrariwise a sacrament of great import and teaching for the Church which has always administered it albeit for various reasons. The apostle Peter probably has the best summary statement concerning baptism here:

1 Peter 3:18-22 (ASV) "Because Christ also suffered for sins once, the righteous for the unrighteous, that he might bring us to God; being put to death in the flesh, but made alive in the spirit; in which also he went and preached unto the spirits in prison, that aforetime were disobedient, when the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls, were saved through water: which also after a true likeness doth now save you, [even] baptism, not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the interrogation of a good conscience toward God, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ; who is one the right hand of God, having gone into heaven; angels and authorities and powers being made subject unto him."

In His grace,

Quote

Pilgrim said:

Quote

xyz said:
There is no general command for water baptism anywhere in Scripture.
<cut>
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.

xyz,

Strange how all my English translations of the Bible and both my Greek texts (Westcott-Hort and TR) all have myriad passages which specifically state that believers+ are to be baptized. Whereas you may not be using the same reference material, I'll provide just a few of those passages for your benefit below:

<blockquote>
Matthew 28:19 (ASV) "Go ye therefore, and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them into the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit:"

Acts 2:38 (ASV) "And Peter [said] unto them, Repent ye, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ unto the remission of your sins; and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit."

Acts 10:48 (ASV) "And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. Then prayed they him to tarry certain days."

1 Corinthians 1:12-16 (ASV) "Now this I mean, that each one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos: and I of Cephas; and I of Christ. Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized into the name of Paul? I thank God that I baptized none of you, save Crispus and Gaius; lest any man should say that ye were baptized into my name. And I baptized also the household of Stephanas: besides, I know not whether I baptized any other." (the passage undeniably implies that Christian baptism was universally practiced and is assumed here by Paul)<br>
</blockquote>

The first of these is a general command, but does not mention water; the next two are not general commands; the last is not command. The fact that Paul baptized so remarkably few is indication of his own view of its importance.

Quote

Secondly, I cannot understand your description of baptism as a "now empty ritual"?

You do not understand what John said to the Pharisees and Sadducees?

Quote

The covenant sign of baptism, which replaced the covenant sign of circumcision (cf. Col 2:11, 12)

The 'circumcision done by Christ' is spiritual, in obedience to this command:

'"Circumcise your hearts, therefore, and do not be stiff-necked any longer."' Dt 10:16 NIV

Quote

The apostle Peter probably has the best summary statement concerning baptism here:

<blockquote>
1 Peter 3:18-22 (ASV) "Because Christ also suffered for sins once, the righteous for the unrighteous, that he might bring us to God; being put to death in the flesh, but made alive in the spirit; in which also he went and preached unto the spirits in prison, that aforetime were disobedient, when the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls, were saved through water: which also after a true likeness doth now save you, [even] baptism, not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the interrogation of a good conscience toward God, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ; who is one the right hand of God, having gone into heaven; angels and authorities and powers being made subject unto him."<br>
</blockquote>

Are we to understand, then, that it is water baptism that justifies?

Quote

According to xyz:
A call to repentance is not command for baptism.

So are you saying that in light of the Lucan passages, in which the anointing of John is ascribed to the angel of the Lord, the word of God, and the Holy Spirit, John went beyond his office in commanding his hearers to be baptised?

Quote

Paul_S said:

Quote

According to xyz:
A call to repentance is not command for baptism.

So are you saying that in light of the Lucan passages, in which the anointing of John is ascribed to the angel of the Lord, the word of God, and the Holy Spirit, John went beyond his office in commanding his hearers to be baptised?

Only when he thought they needed to repent, and intended to repent.

Quote

xyz pronounced:
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.

So ....

In view of the fact that corporate worship became to a great extent rules taught by men, may I assume that:

the saints may decide to omit this now empty ritual?

and...

In view of the fact that giving to the needy became to a great extent a loving to be seen, may I assume that:

the saints may decide to omit this now empty ritual?

and...

In view of the fact that public prayer became to a great extent a loving to be heard, may I assume that:

the saints may decide to omit this now empty ritual?

and...

In view of the fact that the apostles' teaching became to a great extent disbelieved, may I assume that:

the saints may decide to omit this now empty ritual?

and...

In view of the fact that the breaking of bread together became to a great extent idol feasts, may I assume that:

the saints may decide to omit this now empty ritual?

and...while we're at it...

In view of the fact that marriage became to a great extent a prelude to adultery, may I assume that:

the saints may decide to omit this now empty ritual?

Wow. It's getting easier all the time to be a Christian!

Are you saying that--apart from the single unique case of Jesus Christ--John made a distinction among the Israelites between those who needed to repent and those who did not? Chapter and verse, please?

Quote

Paul_S said:
Are you saying that--apart from the single unique case of Jesus Christ

How is it known that this case was unique?

Quote

9What then? Are we Jews any better off? No, not at all. For we have already charged that all, both Jews and Greeks, are under sin, 10as it is written:

"None is righteous, no, not one;
11no one understands;
no one seeks for God.
12All have turned aside; together they have become worthless;
no one does good,
not even one."
13 "Their throat is an open grave;
they use their tongues to deceive."
"The venom of asps is under their lips."
14 "Their mouth is full of curses and bitterness."
15 "Their feet are swift to shed blood;
16in their paths are ruin and misery,
17and the way of peace they have not known."
18 "There is no fear of God before their eyes." (Romans 3, ESV)

Quote

Paul_S said:

Quote

9What then? Are we Jews any better off? No, not at all. For we have already charged that all, both Jews and Greeks, are under sin, 10as it is written:

"None is righteous, no, not one;
11no one understands;
no one seeks for God.
12All have turned aside; together they have become worthless;
no one does good,
not even one."
13 "Their throat is an open grave;
they use their tongues to deceive."
"The venom of asps is under their lips."
14 "Their mouth is full of curses and bitterness."
15 "Their feet are swift to shed blood;
16in their paths are ruin and misery,
17and the way of peace they have not known."
18 "There is no fear of God before their eyes." (Romans 3, ESV)

John did not know who Jesus was.

xyz,

At this point your responses to some questions and complete avoidance of other questions has succeeded in making your position impenetrable to at least my own mind.

If you are so inclined, a summary statement on your part might make your position more clear.

Quote

xyz said:

Quote

Wes said:

John was reluctant to baptize Jesus because he recognized that Jesus was the person who had no need for repentance.

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.

Quote

Those baptized by John needed Christian baptism as well (Acts 19:5).

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.

Quote

Christian baptism is a sign of initiation pointing to a relatonship with the Christ who has come

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.

Quote

In His role as Messiah, "born under the law" (Gal.4:4), Jesus had to submit to all God's requirements for Israel

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!

I'm going to be very frank with you. I have answered every one of your objections in the previous passage I've quoted and the Scripture references listed in the comments following it. Your ideas are not consistant with what the Bible teaches.

May I suggests you reread the Scripture in my previous reply and the reference texts noted in the commentary. If you still have doubts why don't you supply the texts that support your presupposition.

Wes

Quote

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

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; a sovereign act of God? What cannot be avoided is that the Lord Christ commanded them to baptize.

Quote

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="" />

Quote

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. [Linked Image]

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. He had no desire to have his own followers; "lest any man should say that ye were baptized into my name." For, one is baptized "unto Christ", thus signifying that they are followers of Him.

In His grace,

xyz,

Several times you have gone out of your way to point out that John was not looking for a single, that is unique, person not requiring repentance:

Quote

In response to Wes saying:

Quote

John was reluctant to baptize Jesus because he recognized that Jesus was the person who had no need for repentance.

you replied:
He recognized that Jesus was a person who had no need for repentance.

Quote

In response to my asking:

Quote

Are you saying ... John went beyond his office in commanding his hearers to be baptised?

you replied:
Only when he thought they needed to repent, and intended to repent.

Quote

In response to my saying:

Quote

apart from the single unique case of Jesus Christ

you replied:How is it known that this case was unique?

I have no clear idea what is motivating you to not believe that John was expecting one, and one only, person to arise would be found not in need of repentance, but the Scriptures very cleary testify against you that he was:

Quote

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

Quote

Pilgrim said:

Quote

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

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

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'.

Quote

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

Quote

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="" />

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.

Quote

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.

Quote

CONTEXT, CONTEXT, CONTEXT . . . how that idea is so easily dismissed by many today. [Linked Image]

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.

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.

Quote

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'.

The dispute is not over "disciples" but over "baptize".

I know of no "gospel teaching that baptizes 'with fire'" but rather the biblical Gospel that calls men to repentance and faith and then to be baptized in water. To deny that this was the COMMON practice during the entire period of the apostles would be more than ignorant, for there are myriad examples of believers (and their households) being baptized in water. Sorry, but I am not going to spend time providing links to the dozens of places where these appear.

Quote

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.

Again, your view flies in the face of explicit biblical passages which teach otherwise. A good summary with biblical evidence can be seen in:

Westminster Larger Catechism

Q165: What is Baptism?
A165: Baptism is a sacrament of the New Testament, wherein Christ hath ordained the washing with water in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost,[1] to be a sign and seal of ingrafting into himself,[2] of remission of sins by his blood,[3] and regeneration by his Spirit;[4] of adoption,[5] and resurrection unto everlasting life;[6] and whereby the parties baptized are solemnly admitted into the visible church,[7] and enter into an open and professed engagement to be wholly and only the Lord's.[8]

1. Matt. 28:19
2. Gal. 3:27
3. Mark 1:4; Rev. 1:5
4. Titus 3:5; Eph. 5:26
5. Gal. 3:26-27
6. I Cor. 15:29; Rom. 6:5
7. I Cor. 12:13
8. Rom. 6:4

Quote

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.

That was Paul's personal choice in order to avoid an inordinate following. If such a risk was not present he would have baptized no less than the other apostles and appointed elders in all the churches he found. However, he chose to let the other leaders in the local assemblies do the baptizing while he focused on missionary endeavors to bring the Gospel message to those who hadn't heard it. The letter was written to an established church not as a directive but as a rebuke to those who were sectarian and given to following an individual rather than Christ. There is no indication whatsoever that Paul held a lesser view of baptism than anyone else. Nowhere does he disparage baptism!

In His grace,

If a man thinks of himself as a leader and no one is following then he is just taking a walk.

.

EXCELLENT points, Paul!

xyz

As I read what you have to say concerning this subject, I am at a loss to understand where you are coming from in this matter.
Besides the very words of Scripture, I have read quite a few theologians both Credo-Baptist and Paedo-Baptist. To the one I have yet to read any that espouse your view.
About the only denomination that does not emphasize baptism that I know of, is the Salvation Army, but I am not certain they would agree with you either.
Would you mind telling us what denomination you belong to, so at least we could understand where you are coming from?

Tom