THE BAPTISM OF JOHN -Gaylon West What is the importance of John's baptism to me in the twenty-first century? Was "John the Baptist" the first "Baptist"? Should I imitate John or Jesus in being baptized? Why does the Bible mention "one" baptism when there are several mentioned? Was John "the
Baptist" the founder of a In his book A
History of the Baptists Robert G. Torbet traces
"roots" back to the "first Baptist baptizing in the (1) John was called "the Baptist" (the Immerser) because he did the baptizing and not because he
was baptized. The author Joan E.
Taylor underscores this purposely or otherwise in her book title "The Immerser:
John the Baptist within Second (2) John baptized only Jews. This baptism was "a baptism of
repentance for the remission of sins" (Mark 1:4; Luke 3:3). There is no church that practices baptism of Jews only nor does
any denomination by the name of Baptist baptize for (Gr. eis, "towards") the remission of sins. If any uses the expression "for the
remission" they will explain that they mean "because of sins
[already] forgiven". If this is
the original meaning then John was requiring people to be baptized because
they were already forgiven. And Jesus would shed His blood on the cross
because people were already forgiven of their sins (same word eis is used by our Lord Jesus in Matthew
26:28). (3) John did not baptize anyone into any church. John did not establish any church nor was
his purpose to start a church. He was
a "Voice crying in the wilderness, prepare ye that way of the Lord"
(Isaiah 40:1; John (4) No disciple of John is ever mentioned as baptizing a
soul. Hence, they were never referred
to as "Baptists". On the
other hand, disciples of Jesus did baptize (John 4:1,2). However, they are not identified as
"Baptists". Only John is so
identified. The first time the word "church" is used in the
New Testament is in Matthew 16:18 (after John's death) and (1) there it is mentioned
in the future ("will build") and (2) Jesus (the preferred one) asserts
that He will be the builder (not John). Who Was John? When the Pharisees' messengers were sent to John, they
asked him who he was. He promptly
confessed that he was not the Christ, the anticipated Messiah promised to the
Jews. They asked him if he were
Elijah; he answered that he was not.
Then they asked if he were "the prophet" (probably referring
to the one promised in Deuteronomy The messengers wanted to know who John claimed to be. John quoted Isaiah 40:3 and applied it to
himself. He was the harbinger for the
Messiah. He was preparing the way for
the coming Christ. Thereupon the
messengers challenged John as to why he was baptizing. John just replied that although he
baptized with water, the one that he was preparing the road for was
"preferred (in rank) before" him (John Cousin to Jesus? Jesus was of the
tribe of Were Jesus and John cousins? The traditional Greek word anepsios ("cousin") is not used in the passage; e.g., Paul uses anepsios
to show that Mark was Barnabas' cousin
in Colossians 4:10. The relationship between Mary, mother of
Jesus, and Elizabeth is sungenis, i.e.,
"related by blood" (Strong and Thayer). Luke
also uses the word to refer to some people in Jesus' caravan from John said that he
knew Jesus as a person but not that He was the Son of God. "Then Jesus came from Since Merriam
Webster defines the English word "cousin" as "b : a relative
descended from one's grandparent or more remote ancestor by two or more
steps", one could very well say that Jesus was John's cousin. Adam Clarke Commentary on the Whole Bible
comments that they could have been related by their mothers. John
Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible states that "The Persic version
calls her 'aunt by the mother's side': intermarriages between the two tribes
of Levi and Judah were frequent."
We can conclude then that it is correct to say that Jesus was a cousin
to John. Not and yet was, "Elijah"? According to
Mark 8:29 Peter had confessed that Jesus was the Christ. Then Mark 9 records the transfiguration and
that the disciples were aware that the prophet Elijah had appeared with Jesus
along with Moses (v.4). Elijah was not
identified as John who the apostles had known. So they were confused and asked Jesus
"Why then do the scribes say that Elijah must come first?" (verse 11). Jesus
explained that Elijah "is" coming first; and Jesus affirms that
Elijah had come and "they did to him whatever they wished" (verse
13). Since the real "Elijah" in
heaven had not appeared before Jesus' ministry, Jesus was speaking of someone
else. The one that actually came
before Jesus was the "voice in the wilderness"; i.e., John the
Baptist. Luke A "prophet" with a twofold
mission John was
filled with the Holy Spirit from conception (Luke The first part
of the mission was to introduce the Messiah, the Son of God, to the Jews ( The second part
of his mission was to make a "prepared people" for the coming
Messiah (providing a ready school of followers) (Luke It may not be
obvious but John was to baptize The duration of John's
mission. Since John was of Aaron and Jesus was of
David, we can find at least three significant points in John's declaration
that Jesus was "preferred before him, for he was before him." (1) John was a harbinger of Jesus and of lower
rank to the importance assigned to Jesus.
John testified of his role, "You yourselves bear me witness, that
I said, 'I am not the Christ,' but, 'I have been sent before Him'" (John John's work
was temporary and would cease. John
explained his role as being friend to the bridegroom, declaring, "He
must increase, but I must decrease" (John Jesus preached
the same message as John, "Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at
hand!" (John- Matthew 3:2; Jesus- Matthew 4:17). Jesus' disciples also baptized (John 4:1,2); Jesus did not personally baptize anyone in water. John had specified that Jesus in contrast
to him would be the one to baptize with the Holy Spirit (John Prior to His
ascension into heaven and on the threshold of the establishment of the
kingdom (Acts 1:6-8), Jesus commissioned a different baptism than John's
baptism and the baptism of His personal ministry (Matthew 28:18-20). John's baptism became invalid
thereafter. [It never was valid for
Gentile aliens.] In Should we follow
Jesus' example in being baptized? People sometimes ask "Should
we not be baptized in order to imitate Jesus and His being baptized." My explanation for years was that no one today
could ever be baptized like Jesus. On
the one hand, the uniqueness of Jesus Himself and His baptism preempted that. The purpose of Jesus being baptized is not
and cannot be our purpose. He was
revealed to 'Then Jesus came from . Jesus
states to John and no doubt for our benefit that "thus it is
fitting". "Thus", that
is, "in this way (referring to what precedes or
follows)" (Strong's). "It
is fitting", "to tower up (be conspicuous),
that is, (by implication) to be suitable or proper
(third person singular present indicative, often used impersonally, it is fit
or right)" (Strong's).
Jesus said His being baptized was "right". What was He saying was right? Being immersed in water? No.
Jesus specifically says it is right to "fulfil
all righteousness." "Fulfil" is to "replete; figuratively,
accomplish, (be) complete" (Strong;
Thayer). "All righteousness", according to
Thayer, is "in a broad sense: state of him who is as he ought to be,
righteousness, the condition acceptable to God." In summary, Jesus affirms that He (and
we) must do all that is right and acceptable in the sight of God. In 1989 there
was a "social message" movie by the name "Do the Right
Thing". A review of the movie
described it as "unparalleled. It implies a simple profound question -
what is the 'right thing'? But
steadfastly refuses to supply even a hint of an answer - appropriately
leaving its central point entirely up to its audience. Instead, the film points to a different,
perhaps more important question 'Whose version of right is right for you?' Its characters remained confused
throughout the movie." What is
"right" must be measured by some standard. What is right to God cannot be determined
subjectively by man. The prophet
Jeremiah declared this Truth: "O LORD, I know the way of man is not in
himself; It is not in man who walks to direct his own steps" (Jeremiah And what is
right to God for one person at a given time may not be right for someone else
at a different time. For example,
Moses was told to strike a rock for water at one time (Exodus 17:6). At another time he was told to speak to the
rock for water (Numbers 20:8). God
determined in both cases what was acceptable to Him and hence, what was
righteousness. And Moses knew what
God wanted in both cases. When Moses
struck the rock the second time rather than speaking to it as God commanded,
he was punished. His
"unrighteousness" kept him out of the promised land. When Jesus was
baptized, God audibly voiced His approval (Matthew "All
unrighteousness [Greek, adikia, "wrong"- Strong] is sin" (1 John The baptism of
Jesus Just as God ordered striking the
rock at one time and then ordered something else later, so it is that God
ordered the prophet John to baptize for repentance unto the remission of
sins. After Pentecost and the baptism
of the Holy Spirit by Jesus we are ordered to be baptized in water in the
name of Jesus Christ for the remission of our sins (Acts 2:38). This is the gospel message commanded by
Jesus: "Make disciples of all nations [Gentiles and Jews] baptizing them
in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit" (Matthew
28:18-20). The standard
of right is revealed to us in the Truth delivered by the apostles (John
17:17); i.e., in the gospel "wherein is revealed the righteousness of
God from Faith to faith" (Romans Not just Jews,
but Gentiles are to be baptized by the baptism mentioned. Consider Cornelius, the Gentile
soldier. Peter: "Can any man
forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy
Ghost as well as we? And he commanded them to be baptized in the
name of the Lord" (Acts It is
righteousness to be baptized by Jesus' authority. If right, then would it not be
"wrong" to not be baptized by His authority? If wrong, then wouldn't it be a sin? If you are the only purest and sinless
person on Earth, would you not sin by not being baptized? If a youth could possibly be
"sinless", should he sin just so he can be a likely subject for
baptism? How many sins will keep us
out of Heaven? If you have not been
baptized by Jesus' authority, would it not be right for you to do so? Peter commands that if you believe, then
they must "repent" of your sins and "be baptized every one of
you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins... " (Acts |