-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Luke 7:28
- Thread starter Judith
- Start date
He was the last Prophet under the Old Covenant era, as the New Covenant had not yet been ushered in yet!Chapter and verse?
John was the last of the OT prophets and the first of the NT prophets. That seems patently obvious to me.
Not to me though, as Jesus saw Him as being the OT prophet predicted as being His forerunner!Chapter and verse?
John was the last of the OT prophets and the first of the NT prophets. That seems patently obvious to me.
So John's baptism was not New Testament baptism and the 12 disciples were never scripturally baptized?
It pointed to the messiah who was not there among them, and water baptism in His name started in Acts, correct?
You're welcome.
"The law and the prophets were until John: since that time the kingdom of God is preached..."
"The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God; As it is written in the prophets, Behold, I send my messenger before thy face, which shall prepare thy way before thee."
"And from the days of John the Baptist until now the kingdom of heaven suffereth violence, and the violent take it by force."
So you don't believe the 12 disciples were scripturally baptized?
Yes, but I don't know when in the scriptures they were, nor by whom, do you?
So you see John as not being last of the OT prophets?
I have no problem calling John as the last of the OT prophets as long as we understand he was the first of the NT prophets. He was the prophet that ushered in a new era. I think some people have a problem with this because they want a "clean break" between the Old and New Testament periods. There is a transition period that exists in the days of John and Jesus.
Yes. They were baptized by John at Enon.
John 3:22 After these things, Jesus came with his disciples into the land of Judea. He stayed there with them, and baptized.
23 John also was baptizing in Enon near Salim, because there was much water there. They came, and were baptized.
Didn't the actual New Covenant age start with the person and ministry of Jesus Himself though?
Matt 20
[16] So the last shall be first, and the first last: for many be called, but few chosen.
Perhaps it is; John was "called". John was "first" "before" those Jesus was teaching. Yet, those Jesus was teaching, were called, AND responded. So, though they be "last" (after John), they become first.
Sort of like in a carnal analogy.....
being first on the airplane, bus, assembly hall, doesn't me you are first to to exit. Often you are first in and last out.
That question draws a finer line than I am able to find in the scriptures. There is a sense in which the new testament is put in full effect with the death of the mediator and the shedding of blood -- compare the teaching in Hebrews 9, especially verses 15 through 22. There also seems to be a sense in which the old covenant was still hanging around, though getting old and decaying (Hebrews 9:13) and wasn't fully moved out of the way -- at least in the minds of many -- until the temple was destroyed circa AD 70.
But to try to draw a fine line within the context of gospels in the New Testament Scriptures and say everything before this is old covenant and everything after this is new covenant is to go where the scriptures do not go, in my opinion. It removes meaning from verses like Mark 1:1-2, making us have to readjust what they say to fit our preconceived notions.
But, if I were going to draw a fine line between the old and new covenants I would take the simple route and draw it in the space between Malachi 4:6 and Matthew 1:1!
Hope this helps.
Jesus was still under the law/Oldt Covenant while here, as he was fulfilling it, and the New Covenant would not be able to be ushered in until he died. rose again and sent the Holy Spirit, correct?
Chapter and verse?
John was the last of the OT prophets and the first of the NT prophets. That seems patently obvious to me.
I agree and to my understanding of scripture Jesus Christ is the last.
1:1 God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets,
1:2 Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds;
1:3 Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high:
1:4 Being made so much better than the angels, as he hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they.
Not only was he a Prophet but he was the answer to the prophesy the other prophets prophesied. He purged out sins and then sat down as a King on Gods his Fathers right hand. To my understanding he is the beginning and end of the prophesy. The last prophesy to be fulfilled will be when he delivers his blood bought children to the Father... Then God will be ALL and ALL.
I Corinthians 15:24 Then cometh the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he shall have put down all rule and all authority and power.
15:25 For he must reign, till he hath put all enemies under his feet.
15:26 The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death.
15:27 For he hath put all things under his feet. But when he saith all things are put under him, it is manifest that he is excepted, which did put all things under him.
15:28 And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all.
The reason I bring this up is because other denomination have claimed a prophet... I don't need to go into who they are to you learned brethren... You and I have been around long enough to know that even though they claim that, that they are false prophets... I will leave it at that as there is no need for name calling on here... Just wanted to add that... Brother Glen
No, I wouldn't agree with that. I believe the Jews were still under the old covenant, and that Jesus was fulfilling it -- but he was never "under" the covenant in the same sense the Jews were. He was Lord over it. Compare Matthew 12:8, Mark 2:28 and Luke 6:5, for example. I have referenced the sense of the new covenant not being in full effect until Jesus died -- Hebrews 9 -- but it is wrong to interpret that in a way that contradicts other scriptures that make it clear that God was already doing something new, as recorded early in the the gospels. And it would seem that at least in some sense God was beginning the new testament when he "sent forth his Son, made of a woman."
Further you add that the new covenant could not be ushered in until Jesus rose again and sent the Holy Spirit. Are there verses that state this? The verses in Hebrews relate it to his death.
Thanks.
The New Covenat was instituted in His blood, by his death on the Cross. correct?
I just have a hard time seeing how Jesus was under the New one, before He died to institute it!