PDA

View Full Version : John the Baptist - Repent and be Baptized



Athanasius
Jan 31st 2008, 06:00 PM
I looked quickly, so hopefully this hasn't been discussed (or at least, discussed too much) before.

I was reading Matthew 3, which you'll find below, and something struck me as interesting. As Christians, we usually assume that before the crucifixion and resurrection of Christ, to atone of our sins we would have had to believed in God, sacrificed animals and, if Jewish, participated in the Mikvah (daily cleansing with water) among a few other things. But here we have John the Baptist preaching a message of repentance and baptism, before the ministry of Christ, ergo, before his crucifixion and resurrection.



In those days John the Baptist came preaching in the wilderness of Judea, "Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand."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.'

Now John wore a garment of camel’s hair and a leather belt around his waist, and his food was locusts and wild honey. Then Jerusalem and all Judea and all the region about the Jordan were going out to him, and they were baptized by him in the river Jordan, confessing their sins.

The immediate thought that comes to my mind is that whereas most people think Christ's sacrifice was good only from that point forward; that in actuality, His sacrifice was good for all time. Which then makes me wonder why the Old Testament required blood sacrifices if Christs sacrifice was good for all time-past, present, and future.

Am I just missing something?

Slug1
Jan 31st 2008, 06:06 PM
This is the way I've looked at it since John the Baptist was baptising before Jesus was sacrificed. He even baptised Jesus.

I've always figured the new covenent was issued in at the birth of Christ and not after the resurrection. I'm probably wrong cause I haven't studied this in depth, just the way I've always felt about this.

lildave7777
Jan 31st 2008, 06:18 PM
i may not be the best person to explain this....but i'll give share my thoughts :)

Jesus sacrifice was eternal (without time) Jesus is out side of time. Man is inside of time. Jesus had not yet been sacrificed on earth in the old testement but death was still the penalty for sin. So as a symbolic representation of Christs eventual (eternal) sacrifice, in faith that someday Christ would come to be the perfect sacrifice the people in the old testement would sacrifice animals.

remember abraham was accounted righteous because of his faith, not because of his obedience or his sacrifice but because of his faith. his obediance and sacrifice were an outworking of his faith.

this was mandated by God as a very visual and graphic representation of penalty of sin and his view on it.

i've probably made this clear as mud...

dave.:)

Athanasius
Jan 31st 2008, 06:25 PM
i may not be the best person to explain this....but i'll give share my thoughts :)

Jesus sacrifice was eternal (without time) Jesus is out side of time. Man is inside of time. Jesus had not yet been sacrificed on earth in the old testement but death was still the penalty for sin. So as a symbolic representation of Christs eventual (eternal) sacrifice, in faith that someday Christ would come to be the perfect sacrifice the people in the old testement would sacrifice animals.

remember abraham was accounted righteous because of his faith, not because of his obedience or his sacrifice but because of his faith. his obediance and sacrifice were an outworking of his faith.

this was mandated by God as a very visual and graphic representation of penalty of sin and his view on it.

i've probably made this clear as mud...

dave.:)

No, that makes sense enough to me and is where my thinking is leaning. But I keep going back to John the Baptist, who is teaching repentance and baptism. Wouldn't that mean that John is 'doing away' with animal sacrifice?

Maybe it's just the symbology of the act, which I understand, but it's just not clicking with me for some reason.

Slug1
Jan 31st 2008, 06:57 PM
Maybe it's just the symbology of the act, which I understand, but it's just not clicking with me for some reason.I'm at work and can't do a search but is there any animal sacrificing during the period covered in the Gospels or the entire NT?

I can't recall any and just another reason for my opinion that Jesus Christ's birth issued in the new covenent.

In Luke 3:3-6 we see that it was foretold by the prophet Isaiah that John was to do what he does... preach about the repentence for the forgiveness of sin and baptise people. This I know without my notes and Bible cause I had to use this scripture in another Bible study I'm doing ;)

Anyway, this time was after the birth of Jesus and before His death.

I don't know if this is helping :lol:

lildave7777
Jan 31st 2008, 07:01 PM
Perchance it would help to think of it another way.

Today we think of repent and be babtised as saying we are sorry for our sins and asking Jesus into our hearts. then we talk to a minister and we get babtised as an outward symbol of our spiritual change.

In the day of John the Babtist repent was a military phrase that meant about face. and babtism, most likely was more indicative of a clensing such as the jews did on a daily basis. so John was telling them to turn from the way they were living and to clense themselves because the kingdom of God was at hand.

Our sin blinds us to the goodness of God. It isn't until we realize that we are sinners that we recognize our need for the atoning sacrifice of Jesus. To me it seems that John is pointing this out. He is saying look at yourself, you are steeped in sin, turn, clense yourself because the messiah is coming.

Also keep in mind that the sacrifical system wasn't done away with until Jesus death on the Cross. Jesus parents made sacrifice for him at the temple. Jesus went to the temple and witnessed the selling of animals for sacrifice, he was outraged at people making a profit on something that should be holy. But sacrifice in the temple was not abolished until the veil in the temple was torn at the death of Christ. And to my knowledge there has not been animal sacrifice since that time.

dave.:)

Buck shot
Jan 31st 2008, 07:17 PM
Also keep in mind that the sacrifical system wasn't done away with until Jesus death on the Cross. Jesus parents made sacrifice for him at the temple. Jesus went to the temple and witnessed the selling of animals for sacrifice, he was outraged at people making a profit on something that should be holy. But sacrifice in the temple was not abolished until the veil in the temple was torn at the death of Christ. And to my knowledge there has not been animal sacrifice since that time.

dave.:)

Good Job Dave, John preached "repent for the kingdom of God is at hand"
Matthew 3:2 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=47&chapter=3&verse=2&version=9&context=verse)
And saying, Repent ye: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.
Matthew 4:17 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=47&chapter=4&verse=17&version=9&context=verse)
From that time Jesus began to preach, and to say, Repent: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.
Matthew 10:7 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=47&chapter=10&verse=7&version=9&context=verse)
And as ye go, preach, saying, The kingdom of heaven is at hand.

There was not a need for the sacrifices to continue because "the" ultimate sacrifice was given when Jesus drew His last breath on the cross! The sacrifices before this could only pay for the sins commited. Jesus' sacrifice paid for all sins.

Athanasius
Jan 31st 2008, 07:20 PM
Ahh, I see.
That clears things up, thanks guys.

Slug1
Jan 31st 2008, 07:25 PM
Yeah, that does make it clearer :)

Partaker of Christ
Jan 31st 2008, 08:42 PM
Psa 32:1b Blessed is he whose transgression is forgiven, whose sin is covered.

Psa 85:2 Thou hast forgiven the iniquity of thy people, thou hast covered all their sin. Selah.

Rom 4:6 Even as David also describeth the blessedness of the man, unto whom God imputeth righteousness without works,
Rom 4:7 Saying, Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven, and whose sins are covered.
Rom 4:8 Blessed is the man to whom the Lord will not impute sin.

In the O/T, their sins were only covered by the blood.
If something is covered it can also be uncovered.

In the N/T, the Blood of Christ washes away our sins

Illumined
Feb 1st 2008, 04:13 AM
I looked quickly, so hopefully this hasn't been discussed (or at least, discussed too much) before.

I was reading Matthew 3, which you'll find below, and something struck me as interesting. As Christians, we usually assume that before the crucifixion and resurrection of Christ, to atone of our sins we would have had to believed in God, sacrificed animals and, if Jewish, participated in the Mikvah (daily cleansing with water) among a few other things. But here we have John the Baptist preaching a message of repentance and baptism, before the ministry of Christ, ergo, before his crucifixion and resurrection.



The immediate thought that comes to my mind is that whereas most people think Christ's sacrifice was good only from that point forward; that in actuality, His sacrifice was good for all time. Which then makes me wonder why the Old Testament required blood sacrifices if Christs sacrifice was good for all time-past, present, and future.

Am I just missing something?

Here is an angle to think about


Acts 18
24Meanwhile a Jew named Apollos, a native of Alexandria, came to Ephesus. He was a learned man, with a thorough knowledge of the Scriptures. 25He had been instructed in the way of the Lord, and he spoke with great fervor[1 (http://bibleforums.org/#footnote_207843080_1)] and taught about Jesus accurately, though he knew only the baptism of John. 26He began to speak boldly in the synagogue. When Priscilla and Aquila heard him, they invited him to their home and explained to him the way of God “MORE” adequately.

More
\More\, adv. 1. In a greater quantity; in or to a greater extent or degree.

Adequate

1.Sufficient to satisfy a requirement or meet a need.



Apollos taught about Jesus accurately, had been instructed in the way of the Lord, also had a thorough knowledge of scripture….but he only knew the ‘baptism of John’.

What is this??

Acts 19
4Paul said, "John's baptism was a baptism of repentance. He told the people to believe in the one coming after him, that is, in Jesus." 5On hearing this, they were baptized into[1 (http://bibleforums.org/#footnote_141380071_1)] the name of the Lord Jesus.

Matthew 3
1In those days John the Baptist came, preaching in the Desert of Judea 2and saying, "Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is near." 6Confessing their sins, they were baptized by him in the Jordan River.


Apollos taught the theme……Repent, confess your sins to God and believe in Jesus Christ.

Does this sound familiar to you??


The point here is that …..his teaching needed to be “MORE” adequate.....ie, it's NOT GOOD ENOUGH!!!

Apollos was taught a ‘more’ adequate way of teaching about God by Priscilla and Aquila.

Who taught Priscilla and Aquila the way of God “MORE” adequately…..and what is the information that makes the teaching more perfect ????

Acts 18
18Paul stayed on in Corinth for some time. Then he left the brothers and sailed for Syria, accompanied by Priscilla and Aquila………

Paul taught Priscilla and Aquila.


What did Paul teach that was so ‘specific’??
Acts 19
1While Apollos was at Corinth, Paul took the road through the interior and arrived at Ephesus. There he found some disciples 2and asked them, "Did you receive the Holy Spirit when[1 (http://bibleforums.org/#footnote_177239497_1)] you believed?"
They answered, "No, we have not even heard that there is a Holy Spirit."



Why did Paul feel it was important for those who believed…..to receive the Holy Spirit???

Titus 3:5
……. He saved us through the washing of rebirth and renewal by the Holy Spirit,
Galatians 6:8 (http://bibleforums.org/%5Ccgi-bin%5Cbible?passage=GAL+6:8&language=english&version=NIV&showfn=on&showxref=on)
…….. from the Spirit will reap eternal life.


1 Timothy 1:16 (http://bibleforums.org/%5Ccgi-bin%5Cbible?passage=1TIM+1:16&language=english&version=NIV&showfn=on&showxref=on)
…….. for those who would believe on him and receive eternal life.
Acts 19:2
and asked them, "Did you receive the Holy Spirit when[ 19:2 Or after] you believed?"

Galatians 3:2 (http://bibleforums.org/%5Ccgi-bin%5Cbible?passage=GAL+3:2&language=english&version=NIV&showfn=on&showxref=on)
……. Did you receive the Spirit by observing the law, or by believing what you heard?

The Holy Spirit is the ‘Living Gift’ of Eternal Life!!!!

Do you think that the other apostles thought that this was important???


Acts 8
14When the apostles in Jerusalem heard that Samaria had accepted the word of God, they sent Peter and John to them. 15When they arrived, they prayed for them that they might receive the Holy Spirit, 16because the Holy Spirit had not yet come upon any of them; they had simply been baptized into[1 (http://bibleforums.org/#footnote_171921359_1)] the name of the Lord Jesus. 17Then Peter and John placed their hands on them, and they received the Holy Spirit.

They ‘accepted’ ,(believed), the word of God but they had not yet acquired the Holy Spirit.

Titus 3:5
……. He saved us through the washing of rebirth and renewal by the Holy Spirit,


What does Jesus Christ have to say about this… way of God “MORE” adequately?????

John 3:3 (http://bibleforums.org/%5Ccgi-bin%5Cbible?passage=JOHN+3:3&language=english&version=NIV&showfn=on&showxref=on)
In reply Jesus declared, "I tell you the truth, no one can see the kingdom of God unless he is born again.[
John 3:5 (http://bibleforums.org/%5Ccgi-bin%5Cbible?passage=JOHN+3:5&language=english&version=NIV&showfn=on&showxref=on)
Jesus answered, "I tell you the truth, no one can enter the kingdom of God unless he is born of ………the Spirit.


Or……as Paul would put it…..
Galatians 4:29 (http://bibleforums.org/%5Ccgi-bin%5Cbible?passage=GAL+4:29&language=english&version=NIV&showfn=on&showxref=on)
……. born by the power of the Spirit…….

1 Peter 3:18
….. made alive by the Spirit,
Romans 8:9
…….. if the Spirit of God lives in you. And if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he does not belong to Christ.



Humanity is lost and spiritually dead,…….the Holy Spirit is a living gift of eternal life that cleanses, sanctifies, justifies, makes us NOT spiritually dead…...’SAVES’ us. THAT IS SALVATION!!!
’Alive’ in Christ

9Marksfan
Feb 1st 2008, 10:28 AM
i may not be the best person to explain this....but i'll give share my thoughts :)

Jesus sacrifice was eternal (without time) Jesus is out side of time. Man is inside of time. Jesus had not yet been sacrificed on earth in the old testement but death was still the penalty for sin. So as a symbolic representation of Christs eventual (eternal) sacrifice, in faith that someday Christ would come to be the perfect sacrifice the people in the old testement would sacrifice animals.

remember abraham was accounted righteous because of his faith, not because of his obedience or his sacrifice but because of his faith. his obediance and sacrifice were an outworking of his faith.

this was mandated by God as a very visual and graphic representation of penalty of sin and his view on it.

i've probably made this clear as mud...

dave.:)

Not at all - excellent post!

9Marksfan
Feb 1st 2008, 10:59 AM
I think it's also significant that, in the context of this message of baptism and repentance for forgiveness, John declares as Jesus approaches "Behold the LAMB OF GOD, which TAKES AWAY the sin of THE WORLD!"

We are so used to that phrase that we forget how RADICAL it must have sounded to a Jewish audience! Here is a MAN who will be a sacrifice - and GOD'S appointed sacrifice! One who would not only cover (good point, partaker of christ) but TAKE AWAY sin - and not only of the Jewish people - but the Gentiles too!

I agree that the new covenant/kingdom of God was ushered in before Christ's death and resurrection - is there an argument that it commenced here, at the start of John's ministry, rather than with His birth? Interesting point.

Buck shot
Feb 1st 2008, 06:18 PM
I think it's also significant that, in the context of this message of baptism and repentance for forgiveness, John declares as Jesus approaches "Behold the LAMB OF GOD, which TAKES AWAY the sin of THE WORLD!"


:bounce: You are RIGHT!!! When you think about how the priest would have reacted to this BOLD revelation!!! :D Can you image how bad they wanted to get him out of the picture and then Jesus literally shook their world.

BadDog
Feb 1st 2008, 11:15 PM
I looked quickly, so hopefully this hasn't been discussed (or at least, discussed too much) before.

I was reading Matthew 3, which you'll find below, and something struck me as interesting. As Christians, we usually assume that before the crucifixion and resurrection of Christ, to atone of our sins we would have had to believed in God, sacrificed animals and, if Jewish, participated in the Mikvah (daily cleansing with water) among a few other things. But here we have John the Baptist preaching a message of repentance and baptism, before the ministry of Christ, ergo, before his crucifixion and resurrection.



The immediate thought that comes to my mind is that whereas most people think Christ's sacrifice was good only from that point forward; that in actuality, His sacrifice was good for all time. Which then makes me wonder why the Old Testament required blood sacrifices if Christs sacrifice was good for all time-past, present, and future.

Am I just missing something?
Xel'Naga,

Observant question.

The OT sacrifices never saved anyone from their sins. Hebrews 10 has a lot to say about that:

Hebrews 10:1-5 Since the law has only a shadow of the good things to come, and not the actual form of those realities, it can never perfect the worshipers by the same sacrifices they continually offer year after year. Otherwise, wouldn't they have stopped being offered, since the worshipers, once purified, would no longer have any consciousness of sins? But in the sacrifices there is a reminder of sins every year. For it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins. Therefore, as He was coming into the world, He said: You did not want sacrifice and offering, but You prepared a body for Me.

Later referring to the OT sacrifices we find:

Hebrews 10:7-10 Then I said, "See, I have come-- it is written about Me in the volume of the scroll--to do Your will, O God!" After He says above, You did not desire or delight in sacrifices and offerings, whole burnt offerings and sin offerings, (which are offered according to the law), He then says, See, I have come to do Your will. He takes away the first to establish the second. By this will, we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once and for all.

And...

Hebrews 10:12-13 Now every priest stands day after day ministering and offering time after time the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins. But this man, after offering one sacrifice for sins forever, sat down at the right hand of God.

He sat down because He was done. Nothing more need be done.

Hebrews 10:14 For by one offering He has perfected forever those who are sanctified.

Sure, sanctification is often spoken of in the NT as something which takes place as we grow in Christ (progressive sanctification). But there is also an aspect of sanctification, seen here, which took place the moment we trusted in Christ.

Hebrews 10:17, 18 He adds: I will never again remember their sins and their lawless acts. Now where there is forgiveness of these, there is no longer an offering for sin.

Later, in vs. 26, we read that there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins... This was referring to the OT sacrifice - not Christ's once-for-all sacrifice. But this thread is not about eternal security.

You asked a perceptive question. My suggestion is that you study Hebrews 10 for yourself, and see what God reveals to you. That is the place to start, IMO, in the NT when studying sanctification - but Hebrews has a lot to say about it, and not just in this chapter.

Incidentally, if you search you'll see that I used to be a frequent poster on this board, but my job and ministry commitments make it unrealistic to do that now. So I may not respond to posts very quickly. PM or email me if you want me to respond to something, as I may not check this again for a week or so.

Have fun!

BD

Athanasius
Feb 2nd 2008, 06:44 AM
Xel'Naga,

Observant question.

The OT sacrifices never saved anyone from their sins. Hebrews 10 has a lot to say about that:

Hebrews 10:1-5 Since the law has only a shadow of the good things to come, and not the actual form of those realities, it can never perfect the worshipers by the same sacrifices they continually offer year after year. Otherwise, wouldn't they have stopped being offered, since the worshipers, once purified, would no longer have any consciousness of sins? But in the sacrifices there is a reminder of sins every year. For it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins. Therefore, as He was coming into the world, He said: You did not want sacrifice and offering, but You prepared a body for Me.

Later referring to the OT sacrifices we find:

Hebrews 10:7-10 Then I said, "See, I have come-- it is written about Me in the volume of the scroll--to do Your will, O God!" After He says above, You did not desire or delight in sacrifices and offerings, whole burnt offerings and sin offerings, (which are offered according to the law), He then says, See, I have come to do Your will. He takes away the first to establish the second. By this will, we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once and for all.

And...

Hebrews 10:12-13 Now every priest stands day after day ministering and offering time after time the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins. But this man, after offering one sacrifice for sins forever, sat down at the right hand of God.

He sat down because He was done. Nothing more need be done.

Hebrews 10:14 For by one offering He has perfected forever those who are sanctified.

Sure, sanctification is often spoken of in the NT as something which takes place as we grow in Christ (progressive sanctification). But there is also an aspect of sanctification, seen here, which took place the moment we trusted in Christ.

Hebrews 10:17, 18 He adds: I will never again remember their sins and their lawless acts. Now where there is forgiveness of these, there is no longer an offering for sin.

Later, in vs. 26, we read that there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins... This was referring to the OT sacrifice - not Christ's once-for-all sacrifice. But this thread is not about eternal security.

You asked a perceptive question. My suggestion is that you study Hebrews 10 for yourself, and see what God reveals to you. That is the place to start, IMO, in the NT when studying sanctification - but Hebrews has a lot to say about it, and not just in this chapter.

Incidentally, if you search you'll see that I used to be a frequent poster on this board, but my job and ministry commitments make it unrealistic to do that now. So I may not respond to posts very quickly. PM or email me if you want me to respond to something, as I may not check this again for a week or so.

Have fun!

BD

Well that's alright if you don't check for a week or so. This post answered my question, as did the others. Looks like it was a misconception on my part. Now I know!

Jerry4America
Feb 3rd 2008, 04:44 PM
I've always figured the new covenent was issued in at the birth of Christ and not after the resurrection. I'm probably wrong cause I haven't studied this in depth, just the way I've always felt about this.Hebrews 9:16,17 clears this up, saying that a testament isn't effective until AFTER the testator is DEAD. So, people weren't saved by the blood of Christ until AFTER he was dead.
Back to the original post, be careful about thinking what John the Baptist said and everybody else before Paul said is exactly in line with the revelation revealed ONLY to Paul (Galatians 1:12). Repenting and being baptized won't save ANYBODY today (Acts 2:38, Mark 1:4) Only believing on the Lord Jesus Christ will (Acts 16:31).

bjones
Feb 4th 2008, 04:55 AM
No, that makes sense enough to me and is where my thinking is leaning. But I keep going back to John the Baptist, who is teaching repentance and baptism. Wouldn't that mean that John is 'doing away' with animal sacrifice?

Maybe it's just the symbology of the act, which I understand, but it's just not clicking with me for some reason.


You are absolutely correct. He is doing away with sacrifices. He is turning the the hearts of the rebellious children to the faith of the fathers, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, which predates the Mosaic sacrifices.

"Obedience is BETTER than sacrifice"

BadDog
Feb 5th 2008, 10:26 PM
Hebrews 9:16,17 clears this up, saying that a testament isn't effective until AFTER the testator is DEAD. So, people weren't saved by the blood of Christ until AFTER he was dead.
Back to the original post, be careful about thinking what John the Baptist said and everybody else before Paul said is exactly in line with the revelation revealed ONLY to Paul (Galatians 1:12). Repenting and being baptized won't save ANYBODY today (Acts 2:38, Mark 1:4) Only believing on the Lord Jesus Christ will (Acts 16:31).Jerry,

Amen. And many do not recognize that.

BTW, some excellent comments on this thread!

BD