Water Baptism in Jesus Name : Is this how it possibly came to be?

[LiveWire]

THIS IS NOT A DEBATE TOPIC JUST MAYBE AN EYE OPENING DISCOVERY FROM EXAMINING SCRIPTURE:

 

I think I believe I know where the Apostles, would have SEEN Jesus Baptize in His Own Name, for the Disciples, to use the same Formula in the Book of Acts 2:38.

John 3:
22 After this Jesus and his disciples went into the Judean countryside, and he remained there with them and ""was baptizing.""

WHOAHHHHHHH!

Jesus, was discovered Baptizing People in the New Testament?

Jesus, the WORD, made flesh, God, would have most definitely Baptized under His Own Authority on EARTH!

He healed in His Name, and said Your Sins are Forgiven, Instructed we cannot get to the Father unless we Go, Through Him. He definitely Baptized under His Own Authority!

Most likely why Disciples did it as well.

 

 

I find this most intriguing!

[LiveWire]

Does that mean, because of John 3:22, we now know that the Disciples, WERE in FACT doing EXACTLY what they SAW Jesus do, including, the Water Baptism Formula?

[R. Hartono]

20 minutes ago, LiveWire said:

Does that mean, because of John 3:22, we now know that the Disciples, WERE in FACT doing EXACTLY what they SAW Jesus do, including, the Water Baptism Formula?

John 4:1-2 explains it was not actually Jesus who baptized people but His disciples, Jesus was  supervising. 

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John 4&version=NIV

[NConly]

19 minutes ago, R. Hartono said:

John 4:1-2 explains it was not actually Jesus who baptized people but His disciples, Jesus was  supervising. 

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John 4&version=NIV

I thought John was the first to Baptize

[LiveWire]

1 hour ago, R. Hartono said:

John 4:1-2 explains it was not actually Jesus who baptized people but His disciples, Jesus was  supervising. 

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John 4&version=NIV

Does that change they possibly were already Baptizing like Acts 2:38, while Jesus Supervised them Baptizing, since they do it all throughout Book of Acts?

[Neighbor]

Hi, it sure is fun to discover something not realized before.

John 4:2 is part of this testimony/record too.

A use of Biblehub commentaries is always a fun way to gain enlightenment from other readers, and scholars of note, of the Word.  https://biblehub.com/commentaries/john/3-22.htm as an example.

[Neighbor]

11 hours ago, LiveWire said:

Does that mean, because of John 3:22, we now know that the Disciples, WERE in FACT doing EXACTLY what they SAW Jesus do, including, the Water Baptism Formula?

Seems Jesus came to and saw John (the Baptist) baptizing with water first.  Jesus had told John that He Jesus was in need of John's water baptism.  Ref/Mat.3:13- The baptism of repentance as Paul explained.  Ref. Acts 19:4

Paul makes a point of telling others, in his own inspired byGod writings, not to be impressed by who may have baptized whom.

Might be interesting to reflect upon the reason he, Paul, was pleased he had not baptised but a very few, individuals. Reasons are explored at  https://biblehub.com/commentaries/1_corinthians/1-14.htm

Anyway, all fun stuff to read and think about. 

[Jayne]

Here's the chronology.

[1] John the Baptist began baptizing - not in Jesus' Name [Jesus had not died on the cross yet] nor for salvation.  His baptism was for repentance.  Matthew 3 and Acts 19.  This was not a bizarre thing for Hebrews as the Law required them to wash a lot of things - and not for hygiene, but for "ceremonial cleanliness" which was different than hygiene. It was more of a spiritual thing that God required. Couples had to wash after sex, new priests had to be washed down, priests had to wash their hands and feet in the huge tub at the Temple, some utensils, parts of the house, and more.  If you were spiritually unclean, you could not worship at the Temple until you were clean.  So, as I said, these Hebrews understood washing and a spiritual connection.

 

[2]  Jesus' disciples knew exactly what baptism was.  They had seen it via John.  The Bible does not say if or when they themselves were baptized, but they knew what it was.

 

[3] Jesus, as their rabbi, not John, took them baptizing.   NOT for salvation and not in the Name of Jesus as Jesus has not risen from the dead yet.  But as the same as John's baptism.  Evidence of that?  Matthew 3:2 and Matthew 4;17.  Jesus is still preaching repentance as John was/did.  Ergo, the baptism is the same.  

 

[4]  John 4:2 - Jesus baptized no one.  This is a clarification, in more detail, of the previous verses at the end of John 3.

 

[5] Jesus had a DIFFERENT baptism altogether.  John said so.  Luke 3:16-17 = “I baptize you with water, but there is one coming who is greater than I am. I am not good enough to untie his sandals. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire...."  That did not come until the day of Pentecost.

 

[6]  AFTER Jesus died and was resurrected, THEN he told his disciple to go and make disciples and "...baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit..."   Matthew 28:19-20

 

[7]  Acts 2 = NOW on the day of Pentecost when the Holy Spirit has come, Peter tells everyone to repent, [ii] be baptized in the Name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of sins, and [iii] receive the Holy Spirit.  Not that baptism saved, but that the Name of Jesus Christ saves.

 

[8]  Acts 19 = Paul explains the difference in the baptisms.

[LiveWire]

2 hours ago, Jayne said:

Here's the chronology.

[1] John the Baptist began baptizing - not in Jesus' Name [Jesus had not died on the cross yet] nor for salvation.  His baptism was for repentance.  Matthew 3 and Acts 19.  This was not a bizarre thing for Hebrews as the Law required them to wash a lot of things - and not for hygiene, but for "ceremonial cleanliness" which was different than hygiene. It was more of a spiritual thing that God required. Couples had to wash after sex, new priests had to be washed down, priests had to wash their hands and feet in the huge tub at the Temple, some utensils, parts of the house, and more.  If you were spiritually unclean, you could not worship at the Temple until you were clean.  So, as I said, these Hebrews understood washing and a spiritual connection.

 

[2]  Jesus' disciples knew exactly what baptism was.  They had seen it via John.  The Bible does not say if or when they themselves were baptized, but they knew what it was.

 

[3] Jesus, as their rabbi, not John, took them baptizing.   NOT for salvation and not in the Name of Jesus as Jesus has not risen from the dead yet.  But as the same as John's baptism.  Evidence of that?  Matthew 3:2 and Matthew 4;17.  Jesus is still preaching repentance as John was/did.  Ergo, the baptism is the same.  

 

[4]  John 4:2 - Jesus baptized no one.  This is a clarification, in more detail, of the previous verses at the end of John 3.

 

[5] Jesus had a DIFFERENT baptism altogether.  John said so.  Luke 3:16-17 = “I baptize you with water, but there is one coming who is greater than I am. I am not good enough to untie his sandals. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire...."  That did not come until the day of Pentecost.

 

[6]  AFTER Jesus died and was resurrected, THEN he told his disciple to go and make disciples and "...baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit..."   Matthew 28:19-20

 

[7]  Acts 2 = NOW on the day of Pentecost when the Holy Spirit has come, Peter tells everyone to repent, [ii] be baptized in the Name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of sins, and [iii] receive the Holy Spirit.  Not that baptism saved, but that the Name of Jesus Christ saves.

 

[8]  Acts 19 = Paul explains the difference in the baptisms.

Just for Conversation purpose only, one of the Reasons I even began asking about this Following what They, the Disciples, saw Jesus doing, we read later n doing it the similar way.   And I had for some reason not realized the 3rd Chapter show's us Jesus and His Disciples, Them, Baptizing.   And next Peter is making bold statements in Act's Chapter 2, and the rest of the Chapter they Baptize in Jesus Name.

But, I have been reading the connection between the Apostles and Church Fathers for many many years.   They spoke and wrote Greek naturally as I do English.   They probably understood the meaning better than even today's classified Research Experts [Scholars].   But around 70 AD, one of the Apostle John's Disciples, Papias, wrote the Original Hebrew Version of Matthew was written in the Hebrew Language.   He then, furthers, by saying, they did their best to translate into the Greek.  They did not understand Hebrew at all.

Then, around 375 AD, Jerome, journals he had personally not only seen this Hebrew Matthew, but that in his own Writings, he actually Translates the Hebrew Text.

 

Now, These weren't the only people claiming this, concerning Gospel of Matthew was originally written in the Hebrew.   

Here's some Interesting facts:

 

Papias

Matthew also issued a written Gospel among the Hebrews in their own dialect, while Peter and Paul were preaching in Rome and laying the foundation of the Church. After their departure, Mark, the disciple and interpreter of Peter, did also hand down to us in writing what had been preached by Peter. Luke also, the companion of Paul, recorded in a book the Gospel preached by him. Afterwards John, the disciple of the Lord, who also had leaned upon his breast, did himself publish a Gospel during his residence at Ephesus in Asia.  (Against Heresies, 3:1)

Irenaeus was a student of Polycarp, who was a student of the Apostle John.  Around 170 A.D., Irenaeus confirms and elaborates upon Papias’ report:

In Papias’s writings, known as Expositions of the Oracles of the Lord, it is stated by Eusebius of Caesarea, that he wrote: ‘So then Matthew wrote the oracles in the Hebrew language, and every one interpreted them as he was able’ (in Eusebius, Church History, 3.39.16). Papias lived within 50 years after the death and resurrection of Christ.

The Bishop Papia of Hierapolis said: "Matthew gathered Jesus's loghia in a Hebrew dialect and each of them translated them (in Greek) 

 

Origen

Among the four Gospels, which are the only indisputable ones in the Church of God under heaven, I have learned by tradition that the first was written by Matthew, who was once a publican, but afterwards an apostle of Jesus Christ, and it was prepared for the converts from Judaism and published in the Hebrew language.  (Recorded by Eusebius in Church History, 6:25)

 

Eusebius 

For Matthew, who had at first preached to the Hebrews, when he was about to go to other peoples, committed his Gospel to writing in his native tongue, and thus compensated those whom he was obliged to leave for the loss of his presence.  (Eusebius, Church History, 3:24)

 

Jerome (374-420 A.D.) who saw the Hebrew gospel, said he had translated it and on several occasions and he quoted from it (On Famous Men 2 & 3).

 

What's interesting about Jerome's claim to what Matthew wrote, much like Mark Chapter 16, where the Baptism part is mentioned, has by Scholars, and Church Fathers, it was ADDED at a later time.   When you see Jerome's copy of Matthew's Hebrew Version, there is no Matthew 28:19 mention to Baptize at all.  I have a pic and you can see for yourself.

https://html.scribdassets.com/2kxf83y75s5rxu97/images/83-43b2f1c838.jpg

^

been translated to English:

 

 

I am not claiming all things are legit here, this is just a Discussion.

 

But, if this is all factual, then Mark 16 and Matthew 28 Baptism portions were added Later.

 

So, I do believe in John Chapter 3 where Jesus is overseeing His Disciples Baptize, He did have them Baptize in His Name.   And they just continued doing same throughout New Testament.  Even Paul is a part of this.  Anyway, it's Food for Thought!

 

Edited May 25, 2023 by LiveWire

[farouk]

On 5/24/2023 at 9:18 PM, NConly said:

I thought John was the first to Baptize

@NConly John's was the baptism of repentance (Acts 19.4), to prepare the way for the coming of the Lord Jesus.