046. Chapter 25 - The Baptism of John and Christian Baptism
Chapter 25 - The Baptism of John and Christian Baptism John 3:22-36;John 4:1-3 The question is often asked as to the difference between the baptism which John practiced and that instituted by the apostles at the establishment of the church on Pentecost. John’s baptism was practiced by the disciples of Jesus early in His ministry, but they seem to have discontinued this after a time. The simultaneous campaigns of Jesus and John are thus described: “After these things came Jesus and his disciples into the land of Judaea; and there he tarried with them, and baptized. And John also was baptizing in Aenon near to Salim, because there was much water there” (John 3:22, John 3:23).
John’s Baptism and the Ministry of Jesus The message of Jesus in the early stage of the Galilean campaign continued the proclamation of repentance, and the near approach of the kingdom just as John had proclaimed. To this Jesus began to add an unfolding of the gospel (Matthew 4:17; Mark 1:14; Luke 4:15-19, Luke 4:43, Luke 4:44). In the Judaean ministry, which preceded this, His message was doubtless the same. It was (luring this campaign that He joined John in practicing the baptism which John had inaugurated. The great extent of this ministry, as well as the fact that Jesus concentrated on preaching and had His disciples do the baptizing, is seen in the following passage: “When therefore the Lord knew that the Pharisees had heard that Jesus was making and baptizing more disciples than John (although Jesus himself baptized not, but his disciples), he left Judaea, and departed again into Galilee” (John 4:1-3). Between these two passages is recorded John the Baptist’s comments on a controversy between John’s disciples and a Jew “about purifying,” which evidently was a discussion as to the character and purpose of John’s baptism, and as to the fact that Jesus was attracting more disciples than John.
John’s Baptism Discontinued
Shortly after this, John was cast into prison, and his disciples seem to have abandoned any further public ministry and to have given themselves to the task of comforting their imprisoned leader. Jesus and His disciples likewise ceased the practice of John’s baptism as Jesus plunged into the hectic days of His great campaign in Galilee. When John was beheaded, his disciples came to Jesus and his movement was completely superseded by that of Jesus. Sporadic efforts of isolated and uninformed followers of John may have caused the baptism of John to be continued in some fashion after this. This is suggested in Acts 19:1-7, where Paul found twelve men in Ephesus who were disciples of John the Baptist, and, after giving them further instruction, baptized them with Christian baptism. We do not know who had baptized these men. The fact that Apollos had been preaching the gospel of Jesus at Ephesus, but was in ignorance as to the difference between John’s baptism and Christian baptism until further instructed by Aquila and Priscilla, suggests that he may have been the preacher who administered the baptism of John to these twelve men (Acts 18:24-28). The fact that they had never received the Holy Spirit, and that they had not been baptized in the name of Jesus, and that John’s baptism was preparatory to the coming of Christ, is emphasized by Paul (Acts 19:2-5).
Purpose of John’s Baptism
One phase of John’s baptism is still under considerable discussion. Did it, when preceded by a spiritual reformation, have a part in the procuring of forgiveness, or was it only unto repentance? Matthew says: “They were baptized by him in the river Jordan, confessing their sins” (Matthew 3:6). Mark uses the same phrase, and also “baptism of repentance unto the remission of sins” (Mark 1:4, Mark 1:5). Luke uses the latter phrase (Luke 3:3). Paul says: “John baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying unto the people that they should believe on him who should come after him, that is, on Jesus” (Acts 19:4). Some hold that the connection between repentance and forgiveness is inseparable, and, if it was a baptism unto repentance, then it must have been a baptism unto forgiveness of sins. But it is plain that there could be no forgiveness of sins without the death of Christ and the fulfillment of His ministry. John’s baptism was a baptism of preparation for the coming of Christ, and was to bring the whole nation to repent and change its life in order to be ready for the Christ. As far as individual forgiveness of sin is concerned, it was like the sacrifices in the temple which looked forward to the complete forgiveness in Christ. They, too, were for the forgiveness of sin,” but the final redemption of the Jews from their sins awaited the fulfillment of God’s plan of salvation for man unfolded in the death of Jesus.
Responsibility on Basis of Opportunity The situation of Jews who obeyed John’s baptism, and died before the proclamation of the full gospel and the institution of Christian baptism at Pentecost, is exactly parallel to the situation of those who obeyed any preceding phase of the Old Testament dispensation: they were responsible only for the light they had. From the fire which Abel obediently lighted on the altar of sacrifice (Hebrews 11:4), on through the increasing light of the revelations and commandments offered during the Old Testament period, in every case the people were expected to be obedient to the revelation granted. The program and institutions continually pointed forward to Christ, and to the actual and final redemption to be achieved by Him.
Christian Baptism Contrasted with John’s Baptism
Those, however, who heard Peter on the day of Pentecost were not instructed at the close of the sermon to divide themselves into two groups: those who had already been baptized by John and did not need the baptism which Peter proclaimed, and those who had never been baptized by John’s baptism and hence needed to obey this command of the Christian gospel. The great multitude who heard Peter preach must have contained both those who had yielded to John’s preaching and those who had never heard him. No distinction was made between them; the same command was given to all (Acts 2:38). The baptism of John had prepared the hearts of the people for the coming of Christ, but it was not parallel to or a substitute for Christian baptism. The following series of parallels states the difference between John’s baptism and Christian baptism:
John’s baptism was preceded by repentance. (Belief in God is, of course, implied in this.) Christian baptism demands explicit faith in Jesus as Son of God and Saviour, as well as repentance.
John’s baptism was on the general authority of God — no known formula. Christian baptism is in the name of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.
John’s baptism was a temporary measure, preparing for the appearance of Christ. Christian baptism is permanent, remaining in force to the end of time.
John’s baptism was for the Jews only. Christian baptism is universal — “all the nations” and “every creature.”
John’s baptism was in preparation for the coming kingdom. Christian baptism inducts one into this kingdom, into Christ.
John’s baptism was unto repentance, to produce a reformation so that those baptized should be ready to accept the supreme blessings at Christ’s hands. Christian baptism is “for the remission of your sins.”
John’s baptism was not connected with the gift of the Holy Spirit. The descent of the Spirit on Jesus at His baptism was unique, but suggestive of the coming of the Spirit into the heart of the Christian when he is baptized into Christ. Christian baptism is followed by the gift of the Holy Spirit. Were the Apostles Baptized? A related question, arising from the text that represents the disciples of Jesus as continuing John’s baptism under Jesus’ supervision, is whether these apostles themselves were ever baptized with Christian baptism. They had evidently received John’s baptism at his hands and now were practicing it. But there is no record of their receiving Christian baptism before they began to administer it on Pentecost. Some would draw the conclusion that baptism is inconsequential — a sort of unnecessary appendage to Christianity — if the apostles themselves were not baptized with Christian baptism; this, too, in the face of the solemn commission of Jesus and teeming references in Acts and the Epistles. In the following keen paragraphs, Alexander Campbell shows that the apostles were commanded of God to inaugurate Christ’s ordinance of baptism, and that they therefore were not subject to it themselves: “Who says John’s baptism is identical with Christian baptism? Who teaches so? They are indeed much more nearly identical than the Jewish and Christian religions. They are, however, precisely identical in two or three grand points. First, the action in both is immersion in water. Second, the subject of both is a professed believer and reformer. Third, in the intention of the subject — his reformation of life, his subordination to law — in all these they are similar, and identical. There are some points, however, in which they are not identical. John’s baptism was not administered in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. This revelation was not yet given; nor were the facts believed in both cases the same. The Messiah and His kingdom were coming in the first. They have come in the second. Was John Baptized?
“My friend asks me who baptized those in the previous — the intercalary — dispensation. Who baptized John? Who baptized the first Baptist? Should I not be able to show who baptized these, what then? What will the gentleman infer from our ignorance in this case? Are we to infer that they never were baptized? What does that prove or disprove? No person who, in any age, sets up an institution, was himself a subject of it. An executor was to be appointed. When a person is appointed by God to set up an institution, he is not himself to be regarded as a subject of that institution. In the style of Mr. B., we might ask: Who consecrated Moses? Who put the miter upon the head of Aaron? Who poured the consecration oil upon his head? Who anointed Melchizedek? What a sage question! Who married Adam? The gentleman will find a satisfactory answer to his difficulties in these cases.
“Who baptized John? God bade him baptize. My friend asks, ‘Was he in the Christian church?’ No; because there was no Christian church at that time. The Messiah was not yet slain — the corner stone was not yet laid. Meantime, I ask: What was John to do? What was Jesus to do? What were the holy twelve to do? They were to prepare a people for the new institution: some stones must be quarried out; some materials for the building must be gathered. The proper time and place for erecting the building was ordained by God Himself. The twelve were baptized by John; they were amongst those prepared for the Messiah’s kingdom. Some one must commence the institution, there must be some one to commence Christian baptism: that could not be done till Jesus had died, was buried, and rose again: because Christians are said to be baptized into His death, they are said to be buried with Him, and to rise with Him...
“They began to immerse into Christ on the day of Pentecost. Those prepared for the kingdom of heaven, and commissioned by the Messiah, had the same authority to administer baptism that John the Baptist had; the same divine warrant from the great King. Read the commission; will not that suffice?” (Campbell-Rice Debate, p 256).
Baptism Unique and Profoundly Significant
John’s baptism was new and startling. Nothing like it had been practiced in the Old Testament. Men had been commanded to immerse themselves, but the institution John promulgated was different. The complete dedication of the individual to John’s great movement of preparation for the coming of the Messiah was solemnly and beautifully shown in the act. The people were prepared for the more profound significance of the act of obedience to Christ in baptism