MARK 1:4 JOHN'S BAPTISM

[DougE]

Mark 1:4 John did baptize in the wilderness, and preach the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins.

John's baptism was for the remission of sins, to cleanse Israel as priests in the coming Davidic kingdom, in which, Israel would reign with Christ on earth.

1:8 I indeed have baptized you with water: but he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost.

John baptized with water according to the covenant and the law. Jesus would baptize not with water, but with the Holy Ghost. The Holy Ghost came on the disciples at Pentecost according to the New Testament. The New Testament was only for Israel and Judah. By the Holy Spirit, Israel would be given a new heart and would be able to keep the law.

 

[csuguy]

First off, I'm going to assume you meant "New Covenant" in the statement "The New Testament was only for Israel and Judah." Else you will have to reject the entirety of the scriptures as having any applicability to you (albeit, you Dispensationalists aren't far off from asserting just that).

Secondly, the idea that the New Covenant is only for Israel is simply false. Start with the fact that Paul, whose ministry is to the gentiles, is a minister of the New Covenant.

2 Corinthians 3:6 He has made us competent as ministers of a new covenant—not of the letter but of the Spirit; for the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life.​

1 Corinthians 11:23-34 For I received from the Lord what I also passed on to you: The Lord Jesus, on the night he was betrayed, took bread, 24 and when he had given thanks, he broke it and said, “This is my body, which is for you; do this in remembrance of me.” 25 In the same way, after supper he took the cup, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood; do this, whenever you drink it, in remembrance of me.” 26 For whenever you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes. 27 So then, whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of sinning against the body and blood of the Lord. 28 Everyone ought to examine themselves before they eat of the bread and drink from the cup. 29 For those who eat and drink without discerning the body of Christ eat and drink judgment on themselves. 30 That is why many among you are weak and sick, and a number of you have fallen asleep. 31 But if we were more discerning with regard to ourselves, we would not come under such judgment. 32 Nevertheless, when we are judged in this way by the Lord, we are being disciplined so that we will not be finally condemned with the world. 33 So then, my brothers and sisters, when you gather to eat, you should all eat together. 34 Anyone who is hungry should eat something at home, so that when you meet together it may not result in judgment. And when I come I will give further directions.​

 

[DougE]

First off, I'm going to assume you meant "New Covenant" in the statement "The New Testament was only for Israel and Judah." Else you will have to reject the entirety of the scriptures as having any applicability to you (albeit, you Dispensationalists aren't far off from asserting just that).

Secondly, the idea that the New Covenant is only for Israel is simply false. Start with the fact that Paul, whose ministry is to the gentiles, is a minister of the New Covenant.

2 Corinthians 3:6 He has made us competent as ministers of a new covenant—not of the letter but of the Spirit; for the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life.​

1 Corinthians 11:23-34 For I received from the Lord what I also passed on to you: The Lord Jesus, on the night he was betrayed, took bread, 24 and when he had given thanks, he broke it and said, “This is my body, which is for you; do this in remembrance of me.” 25 In the same way, after supper he took the cup, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood; do this, whenever you drink it, in remembrance of me.” 26 For whenever you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes. 27 So then, whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of sinning against the body and blood of the Lord. 28 Everyone ought to examine themselves before they eat of the bread and drink from the cup. 29 For those who eat and drink without discerning the body of Christ eat and drink judgment on themselves. 30 That is why many among you are weak and sick, and a number of you have fallen asleep. 31 But if we were more discerning with regard to ourselves, we would not come under such judgment. 32 Nevertheless, when we are judged in this way by the Lord, we are being disciplined so that we will not be finally condemned with the world. 33 So then, my brothers and sisters, when you gather to eat, you should all eat together. 34 Anyone who is hungry should eat something at home, so that when you meet together it may not result in judgment. And when I come I will give further directions.​

Hello

The new testament or the new covenant are the same thing. The new testament is only given to the house of Israel and Judah. We are not under the new testament. It was given to Israel to keep the law.

How shall not the ministration of the spirit be rather glorious? 2 Corinthians 3:8

Paul is an able minister of the new testament in regard to the ministry of the Spirit not the law.

We have the spiritual blessings of the new testament.

 

[csuguy]

Hello

The new testament or the new covenant are the same thing. The new testament is only given to the house of Israel and Judah. We are not under the new testament. It was given to Israel to keep the law.

No - the New Testament refers to the collection of scriptures written after Christ. This would include all of Paul's writings, for instance. Do you now reject Paul too?

How shall not the ministration of the spirit be rather glorious? 2 Corinthians 3:8

Paul is an able minister of the new testament in regard to the ministry of the Spirit not the law.

We have the spiritual blessings of the new testament.

If Paul is a minister of the New Covenant, and his ministry was to the Gentiles, then the New Covenant applies to the Gentiles.

 

[k0de]

Mark 1:4 John did baptize in the wilderness, and preach the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins.

John's baptism was for the remission of sins, to cleanse Israel as priests in the coming Davidic kingdom, in which, Israel would reign with Christ on earth.

What about Jesus did John also baptized Him for the remission of sin?

1:8 I indeed have baptized you with water: but he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost.

A consuming fire or a non consuming fire like that of the burning bush?

John baptized with water according to the covenant and the law. Jesus would baptize not with water, but with the Holy Ghost. The Holy Ghost came on the disciples at Pentecost according to the New Testament. The New Testament was only for Israel and Judah. By the Holy Spirit, Israel would be given a new heart and would be able to keep the law.

How is the New Testament only for Israel and Judah?

 

[DougE]

What about Jesus did John also baptized Him for the remission of sin?

A consuming fire or a non consuming fire like that of the burning bush?

How is the New Testament only for Israel and Judah?

Hi

Jesus was baptized to fulfill all righteousness

Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah: Jeremiah 31:31

 

[k0de]

Hi

Jesus was baptized to fulfill all righteousness

Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah: Jeremiah 31:31

Thanks...

This is an excellent topic. We know that the Church has universally accepted baptism as the rite of Christianity. But there is disagreement regarding what baptism accomplishes, who is worthy of baptism, and the proper mode and practices. From my sources I learned that there is 3 major position on baptism.

1. Baptism necessary for salvation
2. Baptism achieving salvation, But is only a sign and seal of salvation.
3.God along is responsible for salvation and baptism is nothing but a testimony.

These three position are in disagreement on how baptism work with conversion.

So if Jesus was baptized to fulfill all righteousness. In which of these three position would you say His baptism would be consider?

And which of these 3 position do you consider?

 

[Right Divider]

Thanks...

This is an excellent topic. We know that the Church has universally accepted baptism as the rite of Christianity. But there is disagreement regarding what baptism accomplishes, who is worthy of baptism, and the proper mode and practices. From my sources I learned that there is 3 major position on baptism.

1. Baptism necessary for salvation
2. Baptism achieving salvation, But is only a sign and seal of salvation.
3.God along is responsible for salvation and baptism is nothing but a testimony.

These three position are in disagreement on how baptism work with conversion.

So if Jesus was baptized to fulfill all righteousness. In which of these three position would you say His baptism would be consider?

And which of these 3 position do you consider?

You're still missing the correct position.

WATER baptism has no place in the body of Christ.

Yes, I know that this is a very unpopular position, but it is the correct one. Paul says that there is ONE baptism in the body of Christ and there is no water involved.

 

[k0de]

You're still missing the correct position.

Which is?

WATER baptism has no place in the body of Christ.Yes, I know that this is a very unpopular position, but it is the correct one. Paul says that there is ONE baptism in the body of Christ and there is no water involved.

Well then how can Paul explain to Peter what took place in Acts 10:44-48?

"While Peter was still speaking these words, the Holy Spirit came on all who heard the message.The circumcised believers who had come with Peter were astonished that the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out even on Gentiles.For they heard them speaking in tongues[a] and praising God. Then Peter said, “Surely no one can stand in the way of their being baptized with water. They have received the Holy Spirit just as we have. So he ordered that they be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. Then they asked Peter to stay with them for a few days."

 

[Right Divider]

Which is?

What I said in the rest of the post.

Well then how can Paul explain to Peter what took place in Acts 10:44-48?

While Peter was still speaking these words, the Holy Spirit came on all who heard the message.The circumcised believers who had come with Peter were astonished that the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out even on Gentiles.For they heard them speaking in tongues[a] and praising God. Then Peter said, “Surely no one can stand in the way of their being baptized with water. They have received the Holy Spirit just as we have. So he ordered that they be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. Then they asked Peter to stay with them for a few days."

Peter was not a minister of the body of Christ. Peter and the eleven were given a calling to judge Israel (twelve thrones, etc.). The body of Christ is not Israel and visa versa.
Paul specifically says that there is ONE baptism in the body of Christ. That is clearly the baptism by the Spirit into the body and has nothing to do with a water ceremony.

 

[k0de]

What I said in the rest of the post.


Peter was not a minister of the body of Christ. Peter and the eleven were given a calling to judge Israel (twelve thrones, etc.). The body of Christ is not Israel and visa versa.
Paul specifically says that there is ONE baptism in the body of Christ. That is clearly the baptism by the Spirit into the body and has nothing to do with a water ceremony.

I think I'm starting to understand your position. Question? And Correct me if I'm wrong.

"The body of Christ is not Israel and visa versa."

Do you mean the Church when you say the body of Christ. And the decedents of Abraham (Jews)when you say Israel. If I'm correct this will clarify my understanding.

I'm I correct?

 

[Right Divider]

I think I'm starting to understand your position. Question? And Correct me if I'm wrong.

"The body of Christ is not Israel and visa versa."

Do you mean the Church when you say the body of Christ. And the decedents of Abraham (Jews)when you say Israel. If I'm correct this will clarify my understanding.

I'm I correct?

There are many churches in the Bible. So I stick to using the term "the body of Christ" to refer to "the church which is His body". This is the mystery church revealed to and through the apostle Paul.

And no, Israel are the descents of Jacob (renamed Israel). Israel was Abraham's grandson.

Abraham had many descendants that are not Israel (one of his descendants is Ishmael).

 

[DougE]

Thanks...

This is an excellent topic. We know that the Church has universally accepted baptism as the rite of Christianity. But there is disagreement regarding what baptism accomplishes, who is worthy of baptism, and the proper mode and practices. From my sources I learned that there is 3 major position on baptism.

1. Baptism necessary for salvation
2. Baptism achieving salvation, But is only a sign and seal of salvation.
3.God along is responsible for salvation and baptism is nothing but a testimony.

These three position are in disagreement on how baptism work with conversion.

So if Jesus was baptized to fulfill all righteousness. In which of these three position would you say His baptism would be consider?

And which of these 3 position do you consider?

Hello

Thanks for your comments and questions.

I do not hold to any of these positions.

Baptism was for Israel. Jews had to believe in the name of Jesus to be saved unto eternal life. They had to believe on Jesus as Christ the Son of God. Then they were commanded to be baptized for the remission of Sins, just like John's baptism. After Jesus was crucified they were to be baptized for the remissions of sins and to receive the Holy Ghost to enable them to keep the law to enter the prophetic Davidic kingdom on earth and reign over the Gentiles with Christ.

Paul never commanded baptism under this dispensation of grace.

Israel was set aside gradually and Paul was given revelations by Christ.

 

[k0de]

There are many churches in the Bible. So I stick to using the term "the body of Christ" to refer to "the church which is His body". This is the mystery church revealed to and through the apostle Paul.

And no, Israel are the descents of Jacob (renamed Israel). Israel was Abraham's grandson.

Abraham had many descendants that are not Israel (one of his descendants is Ishmael).

Now I think we can communicate better. I starting to see more light with this clarification.
Thanks

 

[k0de]

Hello

Thanks for your comments and questions.

I do not hold to any of these positions.

Baptism was for Israel. Jews had to believe in the name of Jesus to be saved unto eternal life. They had to believe on Jesus as Christ the Son of God. Then they were commanded to be baptized for the remission of Sins, just like John's baptism. After Jesus was crucified they were to be baptized for the remissions of sins and to receive the Holy Ghost to enable them to keep the law to enter the prophetic Davidic kingdom on earth and reign over the Gentiles with Christ.

Paul never commanded baptism under this dispensation of grace.

Israel was set aside gradually and Paul was given revelations by Christ.

I'm starting to see more light about your position. Before I couldn't distinguish what you meant with Isreal and and the body Christ. But know I do. Another poster Right Divider explained it in our conversation.

I'm going to look more closely to the claim that water baptism was for the children of Israel only. Thanks for the guide.

 

[csuguy]

I'm going to look more closely to the claim that water baptism was for the children of Israel only. Thanks for the guide.

Acts 10:44-48 While Peter was still speaking these words, the Holy Spirit came on all who heard the message. 45 The circumcised believers who had come with Peter were astonished that the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out even on Gentiles. 46 For they heard them speaking in tongues and praising God.

Then Peter said, 47 “Surely no one can stand in the way of their being baptized with water. They have received the Holy Spirit just as we have.” 48 So he ordered that they be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. Then they asked Peter to stay with them for a few days.

 

[k0de]

Acts 10:44-48 While Peter was still speaking these words, the Holy Spirit came on all who heard the message. 45 The circumcised believers who had come with Peter were astonished that the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out even on Gentiles. 46 For they heard them speaking in tongues and praising God.

Then Peter said, 47 “Surely no one can stand in the way of their being baptized with water. They have received the Holy Spirit just as we have.” 48 So he ordered that they be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. Then they asked Peter to stay with them for a few days.

Yes. I agree with you also. But I also like to look into to other people position and proof their claim. What I make from some posters on this site is that there is 2 gospels. One for the children of Israel which is assigned to Peter. And another gospel for the Gentiles which was assigned to Paul.

I'm looking into this position more closely through the scriptures. But I'm not sold on it. I am still on your side one gospel for all.

But I have to test their spirits before I can agree or disagree [emoji3]

 

[Right Divider]

Wow...so one of the TWELVE apostles that will sit on TWELVE thrones judging the TWELVE tribes of ISRAEL ordered that a devout gentile that gave much alms to THE PEOPLE and that had ALREADY received the Holy Spirit to get wet is proof that WE should get wet?

Peter did not even know the mystery of Christ per Paul at that time.

Please show us where Paul commands water baptism in the body of Christ. He doesn't.

 

[k0de]

Wow...so one of the TWELVE apostles that will sit on TWELVE thrones judging the TWELVE tribes of ISRAEL ordered that a devout gentile that gave much alms to THE PEOPLE and that had ALREADY received the Holy Spirit to get wet is proof that WE should get wet?

Peter did not even know the mystery of Christ per Paul at that time.

Please show us where Paul commands water baptism in the body of Christ. He doesn't.

Question RD. So When Paul writes in Galatians any other gospel preached is accursed, then are Peter and John accursed?

 

[Right Divider]

Question RD. So When Paul writes in Galatians any other gospel preached is accursed, then are Peter and John accursed?

No... you need to read that Galatians passage in context. Please see my blog post: http://theologyonline.com/entry.php?3469-Another-gospel-in-Galatians-1