Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Baptism and the Law

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Baptism and the Law

    John the Baptist first introduced the concept of baptism in the bible. At the time, sin offering and sacrifice were still in situ. Col 2:12 says we are buried with Christ in baptism...

    1. How do we reconcile this statement with the baptisms that occurred while Jesus was still standing?
    2. Why did Jesus need to be baptised when he was without sin?

  • #2
    Re: Baptism and the Law

    Originally posted by Trivalee View Post
    John the Baptist first introduced the concept of baptism in the bible. At the time, sin offering and sacrifice were still in situ. Col 2:12 says we are buried with Christ in baptism...

    1. How do we reconcile this statement with the baptisms that occurred while Jesus was still standing?
    2. Why did Jesus need to be baptised when he was without sin?
    Marvelous questions.

    "Baptism" means "immersed in water like dyeing a garment" It implies being totally "dunked".

    Although I know what you mean, and do not dispute that Baptisms started with John, the concept of Baptism is the oldest concept of the Bible besides God's infinite power. We find it in Genesis 1:2. The earth was covered with water. It was IMMERSED in water. Then, as we travel through scripture we find the "Immersion" of the earth in Noah's time some 1655 years after Adam was made. Then, Abraham the idol worshiper, to get to God's destination, must pass through "the flood", no doubt the River Euphrates (Josh.24:2-3). Then, Israel, after worshiping idols in Egypt, must pass through another "flood" - the Red Sea (Josh.24:14-15). And again, Israel, after failing so miserably in the Wilderness and worshiping idols (Act.7:39-43), must pass through Jordan "in flood" (Josh.3:15), leave twelve stones in the river bed and take twelve stones out of the river and into the Good Land.

    Baptism, or "Immersion" is a process whereby God "buries" the old and sinful and polluted out of sight, and raises up a new entity for His purpose. This, should help us answer the two questions.
    1. When John Baptist came, Israel was in crisis. Although they had returned from Babylon, built the Temple and had the Law enforced, Israel was in darkness. They were ruled by (i) foreign government, (ii) an Edomite and (iii) an illegal self-elected sect "sitting in Moses' Seat". The nation was full of leaven, men's traditions, wrong motives, sickness, demon-possession and death - all indicators of a broken Covenant of Law. So John introduces that age-old solution - "Immersion of the old way". Israel under Law had failed miserably and John was commanding them to "repent". "Repent" means to go the opposite way. It means that the direction that Law had led Israel was, instead of life - was death (Rom.7:10). So John said, "BURY IT" and "bury it in God's age-old way" - in the same death waters that Israel of old left their stones - Jordan.
    2. Now we must address the case of our Lord Jesus. Truly He was without sin. He had kept the Law to the last jot and tittle. While He was true Man, having been born of the woman, He was without the "sin"-nature of Adam, Mary having not been inseminated by a man. Why should He pass through the "death-waters"? Why should He be "BURIED" in judgement? The answer is relatively simple. Even though He was without sin, Jesus came from Adam via Mary - the OLD CREATION (see Luke's genealogy). The issue at hand is; "how does God return to His original plan in Genesis 1:26-28"? Adam was supposed to be in God's image and likeness AND he was supposed to rule. But the combination of "flesh and blood" was now unsuitable for RULING (1st Cor.15:50). Our Lord Jesus, though sinless and in the image and likeness of God, got His body from Mary - from the old creation. And for the COMING KINGDOM He must "BURY" the old in symbolic Judgement. Later, He goes to the cross, and the symbolism falls away. It becomes real. In Matthew 20:20-23. The mother of the "sons of thunder" wants her boys in the prime position IN THE KINGDOM when it comes. Our Lord Jesus answers, "can you go trough what I am going to go through FOR THE KINGDOM"?. For the Kingdom it is needful that we die and are resurrected. Our Lord Jesus calls this "my cup" and "my Baptism". Jordan was the SYMBOL that He, Jesus, perfect in all His ways, still abides by God's plan to END the OLD FLESH and institute a NEW FOR THE RULING OF THIS EARTH.

    Now in the case of Israel, for gaining the Kingdom of Israel - the Good Land of Canaan, the same principle is set. The FLESH must be SYMBOLICALLY cut off. So circumcision is introduced and is called in Romans 4:11, "... he (Abraham) received the SIGN of circumcision, ... ." It is a SYMBOL or SIGN that for the gaining of the Kingdom we must put off the old flesh and blood. This SIGN is the part of man in the Covenant for the Land, and any man, though he be an Israelite and seed of Abraham via Isaac, will be "cut off from his people" if he refuses circumcision. God is so deadly serious about this that He, after preparing Moses for 80 years, "sought to kill Moses" for not circumcising his son (Ex.4:24-26). So circumcision is man's part in the Covenant for the Land.

    Now, Galatians 3:29 says that through Christ, we Christians are also now sons of Abraham. Are we then forced to be circumcised? Is it not a Covenant? The answer is YES! The Covenant of circumcision has NOT been abolished (Gal.3:17). So what does God do now, especially as women may now be kings in the Millennium? He changes the SIGN without changing the meaning. It is not anymore the SIGN of the cutting of the foreskin. That was only for the Land of Canaan, and only for men. Now Abraham's seed will inherit the WORLD (Rom.4:13), and for this "flesh and blood" are not good enough. So the SIGN is changed to the "cutting off of the WHOLE BODY" - the SIGN of FULL IMMERSION in the "death waters". So in Colossians 2:10-12, in the context of, "... all principality and power" - the Kingdom (v.10), we Christians, men and women, are, "In whom (Jesus) also ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ: Buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead."
    • The matter is NOT salvation from the Lake of Fire. It is the matter of who gets to RULE the earth
    • Flesh and blood are not fit for this so it is to be SYMBOLICALLY cut off now, and suffer death later
    • The circumcision of Israel for Canaan is a "circumcision made with hands", but for the WORLD it is "made without hands"
    • This circumcision is the death of Christ - a Baptism (Matt.20:20-23), and it is applied to us now as JUDGMENT IN WATER
    • This IMMERSION is our part in the Covenant for the Kingdom of Heaven when Christ sets it up on earth after His return

    So now we can understand John 3:3-5;

    3 "Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot SEE the kingdom of God.
    ...
    5 Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born (out) of water and (out) of the Spirit, he cannot ENTER into the kingdom of God."


    John alludes to TWO THINGS;
    1. A man or woman must have ROYAL HERITAGE to be a king over the earth. Thus, he/she needs to be born of God like Jesus was. The Israelite must be born of Abraham. The Covenant for the Land is made ONLY with Abraham, not the nations. The Christian must be born anew to SEE the Kingdom. This implies that the qualification is of birth from above is needed.
    2. But then we learn that the rebirth only allows us to SEE the Kingdom of God on earth. That is, we will be resurrected at the same time as the Kingdom is instituted. But it does not guarantee us ENTERING the Kingdom. Why? Because the Covenant for the earth is ALSO dependent on IMMERSION (the substitute for circumcision). If we want to ENTER the Kingdom when Christ sets it up on His return, we must fulfill our part of the Covenant. We must be "circumcised with the circumcision made WITHOUT hands" - IMMERSION IN WATER!

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Baptism and the Law

      Originally posted by Trivalee View Post
      John the Baptist first introduced the concept of baptism in the bible. At the time, sin offering and sacrifice were still in situ. Col 2:12 says we are buried with Christ in baptism...

      1. How do we reconcile this statement with the baptisms that occurred while Jesus was still standing?
      2. Why did Jesus need to be baptised when he was without sin?
      I've spoken to this one before. I'm not sure baptism started with John the Baptist. But he certainly made it part of the Christian tradition. John was clearly a prophet, and was led by God to baptize sinners, just as Elisha baptized Naaman the Syrian. Just as Elisha was led by the Spirit to "baptize" Naaman, so was John the Baptist led by the Spirit to baptize all Israel. They were as sinful, as leprous, as Naaman--a pagan Gentile--was.

      Jesus was baptized, as you say, without sin. So he didn't need to be cleansed from sin. But he did establish a precedent for future Christians, all of whom are in some ways sinful. All Christians should, in a sense, be baptized as sinners, particularly if they come out of a pagan, sinful life.

      So what Jesus did was led by the Spirit to set an example for others--not to portray his own need for cleansing from sin. And of course baptism in the Christian sense is no longer a return to compliance to the Law. Instead, it is a turning to Christ both for forgiveness and righteousness.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Baptism and the Law

        In Judaism, immersion in water can remove minor forms of ritual impurity (which is not sin) caused by coming in contact with animal carcasses and the like.

        Also, upon conversion to Judaism one must be immersed in a pool of water. In addition to circumcision (for the boys only obv)

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Baptism and the Law

          Originally posted by Fenris View Post
          In Judaism, immersion in water can remove minor forms of ritual impurity (which is not sin) caused by coming in contact with animal carcasses and the like.

          Also, upon conversion to Judaism one must be immersed in a pool of water. In addition to circumcision (for the boys only obv)
          Glad to hear baptism dates back to OT times.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Baptism and the Law

            Originally posted by Trivalee View Post
            2. Why did Jesus need to be baptised when he was without sin?
            John the Baptist didn't understand either:

            Mat 3:14 But John forbad him, saying, I have need to be baptized of thee, and comest thou to me?
            Mat 3:15 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.


            Jesus basically just said "Do it anyways." It wasn't to remove sin as you said. It was to set an example and to fulfill righteous things.
            James 4:10 Humble yourselves in the sight of the Lord, and he shall lift you up.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Baptism and the Law

              Originally posted by ewq1938 View Post
              John the Baptist didn't understand either:

              Mat 3:14 But John forbad him, saying, I have need to be baptized of thee, and comest thou to me?
              Mat 3:15 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.
              Jesus basically just said "Do it anyways." It wasn't to remove sin as you said. It was to set an example and to fulfill righteous things.
              I don't believe that John the Baptist baptized without fully understanding what it meant. Rather, he through discernment, understood who Jesus is, hence his protest that Jesus should baptise him instead.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Baptism and the Law

                Originally posted by Trivalee View Post
                Glad to hear baptism dates back to OT times.
                I don't think it's baptism. You're saying it removes sin? That's not what it's about in Judaism.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Baptism and the Law

                  Originally posted by Fenris View Post
                  I don't think it's baptism. You're saying it removes sin? That's not what it's about in Judaism.
                  It's *symbolic* of the removal of the guilt of sin. It is divine acceptance that the sin is considered "cleansed." How else could you view Naaman's "baptism" by Elisha?

                  2 Kings 5.14 So he went down and dipped himself in the Jordan seven times, as the man of God had told him, and his flesh was restored and became clean like that of a young boy.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Baptism and the Law

                    Originally posted by randyk View Post
                    It's *symbolic* of the removal of the guilt of sin.
                    It removes ritual impurity. Not sin.

                    How else could you view Naaman's "baptism" by Elisha?

                    2 Kings 5.14 So he went down and dipped himself in the Jordan seven times, as the man of God had told him, and his flesh was restored and became clean like that of a young boy.
                    His skin went from being leprous to healthy? Why see more there than what's in the text?

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Baptism and the Law

                      Originally posted by Fenris View Post
                      It removes ritual impurity. Not sin.
                      Christians view "sin" as not just an act of transgression, but also as a condition. This is what the story of Naaman indicates--not just transgression, but a condition, which was leprosy.

                      Ritual impurity can be either the result of careless transgression, or a representation that the human condition constantly requires ritual cleansing for human works to be accepted before God. Any way you cut it, it is a *human condition* that requires ritual cleansing.

                      Originally posted by Fenris
                      His skin went from being leprous to healthy? Why see more there than what's in the text?
                      If you think about it, Naaman did not need "ritual cleansing." He was not under the Law of Moses, and would not have practiced the Law, unless he converted. This was a cleansing from *human sin,* and not a Hebrew requirement. Hebrews were not required to dip 7 times in the Jordan River, unless there's something you know that I don't?

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Baptism and the Law

                        Originally posted by randyk View Post
                        Christians view "sin" as not just an act of transgression, but also as a condition. This is what the story of Naaman indicates--not just transgression, but a condition, which was leprosy.
                        ....ok..... that's not how Jews see it.

                        Ritual impurity can be either the result of careless transgression
                        Ritual impurity has nothing to do with transgression. It has to do with coming in contact with ritually impure objects. Like a corpse. Is burying a person a sin now?

                        If you think about it, Naaman did not need "ritual cleansing." He was not under the Law of Moses, and would not have practiced the Law, unless he converted. This was a cleansing from *human sin,* and not a Hebrew requirement.
                        You'll have to explain how immersion in water removes sin, then. I thought only sacrifice did that. In Christianity, at least.

                        Hebrews were not required to dip 7 times in the Jordan River, unless there's something you know that I don't?
                        Jews immerse in water to remove ritual uncleanliness. It's not a cure for Tzaraat (commonly translated as "leprosy", although it isn't), so obviously God worked a miracle here, for reasons all His own.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Baptism and the Law

                          Originally posted by Fenris View Post

                          You'll have to explain how immersion in water removes sin, then. I thought only sacrifice did that. In Christianity, at least.
                          There are no sacrifices in Christianity actually. The only one related is Christ's sacrifice but that was under the old covenant and Judaism. No sacrifices are actually a part of Christianity itself which of course came after the death of Christ and his sacrifice.

                          In Christianity sin is removed/forgiven in multiple ways but the most common is repentance.

                          Jas_5:20 Let him know, that he which converteth the sinner from the error of his way shall save a soul from death, and shall hide a multitude of sins.

                          Here a person who converts someone to Christ has their sins "hidden" which is the same as being forgiven.


                          1Pe_4:8 And above all things have fervent charity among yourselves: for charity shall cover the multitude of sins.

                          Here someone who shows charity to others has their sins "covered" which is the same as being forgiven.

                          Here are two examples of sins being forgiven due to having faith:

                          Luk 7:37 And, behold, a woman in the city, which was a sinner, when she knew that Jesus sat at meat in the Pharisee's house, brought an alabaster box of ointment,
                          Luk 7:38 And stood at his feet behind him weeping, and began to wash his feet with tears, and did wipe them with the hairs of her head, and kissed his feet, and anointed them with the ointment.
                          Luk 7:39 Now when the Pharisee which had bidden him saw it, he spake within himself, saying, This man, if he were a prophet, would have known who and what manner of woman this is that toucheth him: for she is a sinner.
                          Luk 7:40 And Jesus answering said unto him, Simon, I have somewhat to say unto thee. And he saith, Master, say on.
                          Luk 7:41 There was a certain creditor which had two debtors: the one owed five hundred pence, and the other fifty.
                          Luk 7:42 And when they had nothing to pay, he frankly forgave them both. Tell me therefore, which of them will love him most?
                          Luk 7:43 Simon answered and said, I suppose that he, to whom he forgave most. And he said unto him, Thou hast rightly judged.
                          Luk 7:44 And he turned to the woman, and said unto Simon, Seest thou this woman? I entered into thine house, thou gavest me no water for my feet: but she hath washed my feet with tears, and wiped them with the hairs of her head.
                          Luk 7:45 Thou gavest me no kiss: but this woman since the time I came in hath not ceased to kiss my feet.
                          Luk 7:46 My head with oil thou didst not anoint: but this woman hath anointed my feet with ointment.
                          Luk 7:47 Wherefore I say unto thee, Her sins, which are many, are forgiven; for she loved much: but to whom little is forgiven, the same loveth little.
                          Luk 7:48 And he said unto her, Thy sins are forgiven.
                          Luk 7:49 And they that sat at meat with him began to say within themselves, Who is this that forgiveth sins also?
                          Luk 7:50 And he said to the woman, Thy faith hath saved thee; go in peace.

                          She has not repented of her sins yet her sins were forgiven and Christ also declares that her faith saved her! Faith can resuls in forgiven sins.



                          Mar 2:3 And they come unto him, bringing one sick of the palsy, which was borne of four.
                          Mar 2:4 And when they could not come nigh unto him for the press, they uncovered the roof where he was: and when they had broken it up, they let down the bed wherein the sick of the palsy lay.
                          Mar 2:5 When Jesus saw their faith, he said unto the sick of the palsy, Son, thy sins be forgiven thee.

                          Same is found here.
                          James 4:10 Humble yourselves in the sight of the Lord, and he shall lift you up.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Baptism and the Law

                            Originally posted by Fenris View Post
                            ....ok..... that's not how Jews see it.

                            Ritual impurity has nothing to do with transgression. It has to do with coming in contact with ritually impure objects. Like a corpse. Is burying a person a sin now?
                            I don't agree. Ritual impurity has everything to do with the sinful human condition. If we were without sin there would be no need for ritual purity at all. Touching something dead, or being "contaminated" with human emissions, are symbolic pictures God used to show the sinful condition of humanity. Death itself was the result of sin. Bleeding was the result of sin. Thus, ritual purification represented God's willingness to overlook the sinful condition of the adherent.

                            Originally posted by Fenris
                            You'll have to explain how immersion in water removes sin, then. I thought only sacrifice did that. In Christianity, at least.
                            1 Pet 3.21 and this water symbolizes baptism that now saves you also—not the removal of dirt from the body but the pledge of a clear conscience toward God. It saves you by the resurrection of Jesus Christ.

                            Originally posted by Fenris
                            Jews immerse in water to remove ritual uncleanliness. It's not a cure for Tzaraat (commonly translated as "leprosy", although it isn't), so obviously God worked a miracle here, for reasons all His own.
                            Elisha did this by prophetic revelation, and not in accordance with the Law of Moses. As such, it shows the prophetic value John the Baptist assigned to this, also under the Law and yet not by prescription of the Law.

                            What this shows is that this is a prophetic rite that can be applied *outside of the Law of Moses,* and directed towards Christians, whether Jew or otherwise.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Baptism and the Law

                              Originally posted by randyk View Post
                              I don't agree. Ritual impurity has everything to do with the sinful human condition. If we were without sin there would be no need for ritual purity at all. Touching something dead, or being "contaminated" with human emissions, are symbolic pictures God used to show the sinful condition of humanity. Death itself was the result of sin. Bleeding was the result of sin. Thus, ritual purification represented God's willingness to overlook the sinful condition of the adherent.
                              This isn't in the bible anywhere. You've invented it whole cloth.


                              1 Pet 3.21 and this water symbolizes baptism that now saves you alsoŚnot the removal of dirt from the body but the pledge of a clear conscience toward God. It saves you by the resurrection of Jesus Christ.
                              So sacrifice is really unnecessary?


                              Elisha did this by prophetic revelation, and not in accordance with the Law of Moses. As such, it shows the prophetic value John the Baptist assigned to this, also under the Law and yet not by prescription of the Law.

                              What this shows is that this is a prophetic rite that can be applied *outside of the Law of Moses,* and directed towards Christians, whether Jew or otherwise.
                              It shows that God can perform any miracles He wishes. It's not the proscription for a new set of rituals or laws.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X