Old Covenant baptism

[Covenanter]

Baptism only in the Church age/dispensation?

I'm starting a new thread to discuss this to avoid the premature closure of the current "Disp" thread.

In dispensationalism, the church is peculiar to the time following Pentecost. There were no churches in any previous dispensation or era. As Baptists, we believe that local churches have: baptism, the Lord's supper, meetings on Sunday, membership, a Great Commission, pastors and deacons, evangelists and missionaries, etc. None of these existed in any previous dispensation or age (even believers' baptism is different from John's.). Therefore, the church age is certainly not an "artificial construction," but one planned by God, even if you are not aware of it.

Hebrews 9:.....10 concerned only with foods and drinks, various washings, and fleshly ordinances imposed until the time of reformation.

μόνον ἐπὶ βρώμασιν καὶ πόμασιν καὶ διαφόροις βαπτισμοῖς καὶδικαιώμασιν σαρκὸς μέχρι καιροῦ διορθώσεως ἐπικείμενα ​

Almost all translations - even the modern Greek I consulted - translate βαπτισμοῖς as washings rather than simple transliteration as they do elsewhere.

The chapter proceeds with examples from Numbers 19 - the "red heifer" ritual for contact with dead bodies, & the blood of the covenant sprinkling of Exodus 24.

The teaching in Heb. 9 follows the introduction of the subject in Heb.6 -

Therefore, leaving the discussion of the elementary principles of Christ, let us go on to perfection, not laying again the foundation of repentance from dead works and of faith toward God, 2 of the doctrine of baptisms, of laying on of hands, of resurrection of the dead, and of eternal judgment. 3 And this we will do if God permits.​

Were the Pharisees expecting Elijah, the Prophet, & the Christ to baptise?

John 1:24 Now those who were sent were from the Pharisees. 25 And they asked him, saying, “Why then do you baptize if you are not the Christ, nor Elijah, nor the Prophet?”​

 

[HankD]

Do a google on the word "mikvah"

 

[Rob_BW]

Do a google on the word "mikvah"

Not the best picture of them, but I'm partial to this one since I took it.

 

[Covenanter]

Do a google on the word "mikvah"

I was hoping for a Biblical answer - NOT google it.

 

[HankD]

I was hoping for a Biblical answer - NOT google it.

You will get a historical biblical answer

PLEASE GOOGLE "MIKVAH" BROTHER

 

[Covenanter]

You will get a historical biblical answer

PLEASE GOOGLE "MIKVAH" BROTHER

This explains why John baptised in the Jordan & not in a mikvah!
And doesn't explain why the Pharisees expected Elijah & the Messiah to baptise.

Certainly doesn't answer my question.

 

[HankD]

This explains why John baptised in the Jordan & not in a mikvah!
And doesn't explain why the Pharisees expected Elijah & the Messiah to baptise.

Certainly doesn't answer my question.

Here is a helpful hint/starting place.

A website from google "mikvah baptism"



Before entering the Temple, Jewish men immersed themselves
in a mikvah, such as this one from the Second Temple period.


Some consider this ancient mikvah site in Betania at the Jordan River in Jordania as the place
where Yeshua was immersed by Yochanan (John).

http://free.messianicbible.com/feat...en-immersion-conversion-and-being-born-again/

HankD

 

[John of Japan]

The Christian ordinance of baptism (baptisma) is fundamentally different from the ceremonial washings (baptismos) of the Jews.

We all know what Christian baptism (baptisma) is. However, here is the meaning from the Friberg lexicon for baptismos: "as a religious technical term related to ceremonial rites of purification by the use of water act of dipping, immersion."

The Jewish version was a purification rite, done for example when a scribe was about to write the sacred tetragrammaton. However, the Christian ordinance has a very different meaning, representing the death, burial and resurrection of Christ (Rom. 6:3-4).

Therefore, as the doctrinal statement of the mission board I was under has it, the church is "peculiar to the age of grace" because it has baptism, not ceremonial washings (and there are many other reasons).

 

[HankD]

The Christian ordinance of baptism (baptisma) is fundamentally different from the ceremonial washings (baptismos) of the Jews.

We all know what Christian baptism (baptisma) is. However, here is the meaning from the Friberg lexicon for baptismos: "as a religious technical term related to ceremonial rites of purification by the use of water act of dipping, immersion."

The Jewish version was a purification rite, done for example when a scribe was about to write the sacred tetragrammaton. However, the Christian ordinance has a very different meaning, representing the death, burial and resurrection of Christ (Rom. 6:3-4).

Therefore, as the doctrinal statement of the mission board I was under has it, the church is "peculiar to the age of grace" because it has baptism, not ceremonial washings (and there are many other reasons).

Yes, I didn't make that clear - Thanks John

 

[John of Japan]

That John's baptism and church baptism were different is eminently clear from Acts 19:

"3 And he said unto them, Unto what then were ye baptized? And they said, Unto John's baptism. 4 Then said Paul, John verily baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying unto the people, that they should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus. 5 When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus."

 

[TCassidy]

That John's baptism and church baptism were different is eminently clear from Acts 19:

If it is different, who baptized the 12 with church baptism?

 

[John of Japan]

If it is different, who baptized the 12 with church baptism?

Jesus Himself did, though they had generally already been baptized by John, as I understand it. John 3:22--"After these things came Jesus and his disciples into the land of Judaea; and there he tarried with them, and baptized" (imperfect active indicative).

When Dr. Monroe Parker taught me about this, he compared the genesis of the church to the history of Pillsbury BBC, which gradually developed into its final Bible college system. Just so, to Dr. Parker Christ gradually introduced what would be the different elements of the local church throughout His ministry, including baptism, meeting in His name, the Lord's Supper, church discipline, etc. The culmination was then at Pentecost.

 

[Covenanter]

That John's baptism and church baptism were different is eminently clear from Acts 19:

"3 And he said unto them, Unto what then were ye baptized? And they said, Unto John's baptism. 4 Then said Paul, John verily baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying unto the people, that they should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus. 5 When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus."

If it is different, who baptized the 12 with church baptism?

The difference is clear when we consider John's message -

Mat. 3:11 I indeed baptize you with water unto 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​

A key feature of John's message was Messiah coming and baptising with the Holy Spirit - which the Ephesians had never heard of. The message of John had been corrupted.

Acts 19:2 he said to them, “Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?”
So they said to him, “We have not so much as heard whether there is a Holy Spirit.”​

 

[TCassidy]

Jesus Himself did, though they had generally already been baptized by John, as I understand it. John 3:22--"After these things came Jesus and his disciples into the land of Judaea; and there he tarried with them, and baptized" (imperfect active indicative).

But doesn't John 4:2 refer back to John 3:22?

 

[John of Japan]

But doesn't John 4:2 refer back to John 3:22?

Well, probably yes. But I take the alla in 4:2 as "except for His disciples" instead of "He did not but His disciples did." A similar usage is in Mark 4:22 and 2 Cor. 1:13.

 

[Covenanter]

Acts 1:21-22 indicates that John's baptism was acceptable. No suggestion that Jesus himself ever baptised.

 

[TCassidy]

Well, probably yes. But I take the alla in 4:2 as "except for His disciples" instead of "He did not but His disciples did." A similar usage is in Mark 4:22 and 2 Cor. 1:13.

Yes, I agree that is an acceptable understanding of the Greek. (It is also an acceptable understanding of "but" in English. "He didn't baptize anyone except He baptized His disciples.")

But I tend to see the Acts 19 verses in light of having an incomplete Gospel "not so much heard of the Holy Spirit." As they were not indwelt, they were not saved. Once saved they were then scripturally baptized. But that's just my take on the subject.

 

[Iconoclast]

Yes, I agree that is an acceptable understanding of the Greek. (It is also an acceptable understanding of "but" in English. "He didn't baptize anyone except He baptized His disciples.")

But I tend to see the Acts 19 verses in light of having an incomplete Gospel "not so much heard of the Holy Spirit." As they were not indwelt, they were not saved. Once saved they were then scripturally baptized. But that's just my take on the subject.

They were Ot saints, living during the transition into the NT reality.

 

[Covenanter]

The Christian ordinance of baptism (baptisma) is fundamentally different from the ceremonial washings (baptismos) of the Jews.

We all know what Christian baptism (baptisma) is. However, here is the meaning from the Friberg lexicon for baptismos: "as a religious technical term related to ceremonial rites of purification by the use of water act of dipping, immersion."

The use of βαπτισμός, βάπτισμα
Is discussed in the link.

It is surprising, if OC washing rituals are implied by baptismos that it should be used in Heb. 6:2 where Christian doctrine & ritual is proposed.

1 Therefore, leaving the discussion of the elementary principles of Christ, let us go on to perfection, not laying again the foundation of repentance from dead works and of faith toward God, 2 of the doctrine of baptisms, of laying on of hands, of resurrection of the dead, and of eternal judgment. 3 And this we will do if God permits.​

Maybe his intention by the plural is to establish the contrast we see in Heb. 9. His choices of example baptisms - red heifer ash & water, & blood sprinkling - are hardly washings in the sense of physical cleansing. In the former case, a water wash was also needed. The blood of the covenant sprinkling persumably wasn't immediately washed off - the elders went up the mountain to see God - sanctified by the blood.

 

[JonShaff]

They were Ot saints, living during the transition into the NT reality.

And maybe Apollos didn't teach them the full realities of Christ's ministry, as he didn't know them himself (Acts 18)