35 [m]James and John, the two sons of Zebedee, *came up to Jesus, saying, “Teacher, we want You to do for us whatever we ask of You.” 36 And He said to them, “What do you want Me to do for you?” 37 They said to Him, “[n]Grant that we may sit, one on Your right and one on Your left, in Your glory.” 38 But Jesus said to them, “You do not know what you are asking. Are you able to drink the cup that I drink, or to be baptized with the baptism with which I am baptized?” 39 They said to Him, “We are able.” And Jesus said to them, “The cup that I drink you shall drink; and you shall be baptized with the baptism with which I am baptized. 40 But to sit on My right or on My left, this is not Mine to give; but it is for those for whom it has been prepared.”
To be fair, how can you say that the word Baptism in Mark 10 is figurative while Jesus here speaks about His imminent death? Please read and respond to that and tell us why Jesus promised his disciples to undergo another baptism different from the water baptism? Could you also tell us why Luke writes in Acts as follows,
1 The first account I [a]composed, Theophilus, about all that Jesus began to do and teach, 2 until the day when He was taken up to heaven, after He had [b]by the Holy Spirit given orders to the apostles whom He had chosen. 3 To [c]these He also presented Himself alive after His suffering, by many convincing proofs, appearing to them over a period of forty days and speaking of the things concerning the kingdom of God. 4 [d]Gathering them together, He commanded them not to leave Jerusalem, but to wait for [e]what the Father had promised, “Which,” He said, “you heard of from Me; 5 for John baptized with water, but you will be baptized [f]with the Holy Spirit [g]not many days from now.”
6 So when they had come together, they were asking Him, saying, “Lord, is it at this time You are restoring the kingdom to Israel?” 7 He said to them, “It is not for you to know times or epochs which the Father has fixed by His own authority; 8 but you will receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you; and you shall be My witnesses both in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and even to the remotest part of the earth.”
John I am sure you did hermeneutics, what do you make of conjunctions of contrast but in the above verse? I asked you to tell us the difference between the baptism of John and that of Jesus and you only said that John's Baptism was not Christian. If it wasn't Christian, why should we continue practicing it? The difference between these two kinds of baptisms is that one uses water as the agent and object into which a sinner is ritually cleansed as it was practiced in the Jewish Religion and stipulated in the Pentateuch. Water baptism just like the shedding of the blood of animals was coming to an end because the perfect baptism was here in the person of Jesus Christ whose blood washes us and cleanses us from all Sin. This is the gospel. Without this blood no one could be saved. Water had flowed in the Jordan river for centuries yet it had never cleansed anyone from sin. People were still sinning and were still under condemnation.
Now concerning water baptism, before the start of Jesus' Ministry, there was a forerunner, one who prepares the way for the Messiah, that was John The Baptist. His duties were;
1. to prepare the way for the Lord, he told people to repent
2. to herald the coming of the messiah the lamb of God who takes away the sin of the World.
24 Now they had been sent from the Pharisees. 25 They asked him, and said to him, “Why then are you baptizing, if you are not the [r]Christ, nor Elijah, nor the Prophet?” 26 John answered them saying, “I baptize [s]in water, but among you stands One whom you do not know. 27 It is He who comes after me, the thong of whose sandal I am not worthy to untie.” 28 These things took place in Bethany beyond the Jordan, where John was baptizing.
3. to baptize in water and specifically to baptize Jesus.
John 1: 19 This is the testimony of John, when the Jews sent to him priests and Levites from Jerusalem to ask him, “Who are you?” 20 And he confessed and did not deny, but confessed, “I am not [q]the Christ.” 21 They asked him, “What then? Are you Elijah?” And he *said, “I am not.” “Are you the Prophet?” And he answered, “No.” 22 Then they said to him, “Who are you, so that we may give an answer to those who sent us? What do you say about yourself?” 23 He said, “I am A VOICE OF ONE CRYING IN THE WILDERNESS, ‘MAKE STRAIGHT THE WAY OF THE LORD,’ as Isaiah the prophet said.”
I asked you a question but you did not answer it correctly. You thought I ask questions because I do not know the answers so you asked me to look up them in the Greek lexicons. Any way, Why was Jesus Baptized yet He had no sin to repent? The answer to this question lies in the scripture;
15 But Jesus answering said to him, “Permit it at this time; for in this way it is fitting for us to fulfill all righteousness.” Then he *permitted Him. What does all righteousness here mean? Sound hermeneutics demand that we interpret scripture grammatically. to fulfil all righteousness is part of Jesus' mission here on earth. The English word here All which is your mother tongue is an adjective of quantity and it means all, finality. Merriam Webster's dictionary defines this word as follows
a : the whole amount, quantity, or extent of <needed all the courage they had> <sat up all night> b : as much as possible <spoke in all seriousness>
2: every member or individual component of <all men will go> <all five children were present>
3: the whole number or sum of <all the angles of a triangle are equal to two right angles>
6 For while we were still helpless, at the right time Christ died for the ungodly. 7 For one will hardly die for a righteous man; [d]though perhaps for the good man someone would dare even to die. 8 But God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us. 9 Much more then, having now been justified [e]by His blood, we shall be saved from the wrath of God through Him. 10 For if while we were enemies we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son, much more, having been reconciled, we shall be saved [f]by His life. 11 And not only this, [g]but we also exult in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have now received the reconciliation.
In the above scripture there is no mention of water. The Blood of Jesus is all sufficient. I do not need water to be justified and there is not even a remote reference to water here. Paul goes on to say thus about the Righteousness that Jesus went down to the Jordan to fulfill;
17 For if by the transgression of the one, death reigned through the one, much more those who receive the abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness will reign in life through the One, Jesus Christ.
18 So then as through one transgression [m]there resulted condemnation to all men, even so through one act of righteousness [n]there resulted justification of life to all men. 19 For as through the one man’s disobedience the many were made sinners, even so through the obedience of the One the many will be made righteous. 20 [o]The Law came in so that the transgression would increase; but where sin increased, grace abounded all the more, 21 so that, as sin reigned in death, even so grace would reign through righteousness to eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.
The righteousness that Jesus calls here ALL RIGHTEOUSNESS is this that Paul expounds on here. Scripture must be supported by scripture not Church History. Give us any other view of what this Righteousness is? Now to come back to Mathew 3: 11, one would ask, How did he do it? You said you like the OT, In the Old Testament, I prefer calling it the First Testament, a sheep or animal that was bound for sacrifice, was supposed to die on behalf of the sinner. This ritual started by the sinner placing his hands on the animals head to transfer his sins to the animal. The analogy I am building here is exactly what Jesus did when he went down there to be baptized by John yet he had no sin. At that point in time John wrote 29 The next day he *saw Jesus coming to him and *said, “Behold, the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world! 30 This is He on behalf of whom I said, ‘After me comes a Man who [t]has a higher rank than I, for He existed before me.’ 31 I did not recognize [u]Him, but so that He might be manifested to Israel, I came baptizing [v]in water.” 3 Jesus was Baptized to FULFIL ALL RIGHTEOUSNESS. He took the sins of the world-He did not have sin yet he went to repent, whose sin was he going to repent? Your sin and mine. Why as the lamb of God that takes away the sin of the world. At this point Jesus assumes the role of the role of the High priest read Hebrews 5
1 For every high priest taken from among men is appointed on behalf of men in things pertaining to God, in order to offer both gifts and sacrifices for sins; 2 [a]he can deal gently with the ignorant and misguided, since he himself also is [b]beset with weakness; 3 and because of it he is obligated to offer sacrifices for sins, as for the people, so also for himself. 4 And no one takes the honor to himself, but receives it when he is called by God, even as Aaron was.
5 So also Christ did not glorify Himself so as to become a high priest, but He who said to Him,
“YOU ARE MY SON,
TODAY I HAVE BEGOTTEN YOU”;
TODAY I HAVE BEGOTTEN YOU”;
6 just as He says also in another passage,
“YOU ARE A PRIEST FOREVER
ACCORDING TO THE ORDER OF MELCHIZEDEK.”
ACCORDING TO THE ORDER OF MELCHIZEDEK.”
Jesus also assumes the role of the Lamb of God and takes up the sins of the world which would be upon him until He sheds His blood on the Cross to render death powerless and secure freedom for us by imputing His righteousness. This act is also a command to us. Jesus said we have to take up our Cross and follow him everyday. Why don't we walk with crosses? Don't you think that the taking up of the cross is more of obedience than just going to dip oneself in water?
Having Th.M or a Th.D does not make anyone a better bible expositor. There are very many I know who now no longer believe in Jesus. Cornelius Stam was a good student of the bible and you did not show me any false teaching he wrote in his books. You only have a problem with the way he handles matters of water Baptism. There are many Christian denominations that do not baptize in water. The Salvation Army, The Friends (Quakers) AND EVEN the Catholics and Anglicans just sprinkle. Does this make them wrong or Right? The answer to this is, they are neither wrong nor right so long as they believe that the water washed their sins. We saved by Grace through Faith.
Now about being baptized into Moses, you said that this meant that the Israelites were made to follow Moses and believe in him through the cloud and the sea. That was correct, isn't that what Jesus instructed the Disciples? Make disciples of all nations baptizing them in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit? It more important to become part of the family of God by following God the Father the Son and The Holy Spirit just like the Israelites did with Moses. The Apostle captures this though in the following words from 1Cor.12
12 For even as the body is one and yet has many members, and all the members of the body, though they are many, are one body, so also is Christ. 13 For [j]by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body, whether Jews or Greeks, whether slaves or free, and we were all made to drink of one Spirit.
This is what the scripture says and Brother John, tell us if the scriptures I have tried to expound are heretical. Do not just say that because Christians have been practising water baptism from time long ago then it is mandatory for every believer to be baptized in water. I get baptized everyday in my house every morning and sometime in the evening.
The bottom line here is all the practices that preceded Jesus came to an end after the death of Jesus on the Cross. Water baptism was John's baptism meant for repentance but on the cross we get perfect redemption from sin. It is my prayer that you will see what God is speaking us now. If Martin Luther would have been contended with the way theology was being taught and practised in the Catholic Church, the issue of salvation by Grace through faith would not have been known.
Now you proudly say that this hyperdispensational teaching you hold was invented in America and Britain in the late 19th century, I'm just stating facts. I think my home country (USA) exports a lot of bad products to the rest of the world, including poor theology like hyperdispensationalism and the prosperity gospel. theology was made
You display arrogance and meaningless pride. What the Church in Africa now knows about God was not brought by Americans and the Europeans. Please know that African knew God. What did not know was how to read and write but when we knew how to, we read the bible and interpret it in the African context. Read Adeyemo, Okot P'bitek,Titie Tenou and John S Mbiti. You should also try and do some study on why there was a rise of African Independent Churches. When all is said and done, you are my brother in the Lord. Let our discussion be fro the glory of God.
God bless you. If you are in Nairobi, I will make a point of meeting you so that we could touch ground. Our God is great.
No comments:
Post a Comment