After Jesus’s Resurrection were His disciples still practicing the Baptism Of Repentance? IF SO WHERE DO YOU FIND THIS HAPPENING AT IN SCRIPTURE?
Good question. Keep this up.
J.
To respond to your inquiry, I need to define “disciple”. Often people may think a biblical disciple as one of the original 12 who Jesus called to walk with Him, and learn of Him; those same 12 disciples he eventually “sent out” with the message of The Kingdom. Being “sent-out they were disciples who were also called “apostles”. However, we know by the time Jesus was crucified, there were many disciples. We read specifically of about 120 in Acts (1:15) from whom the office of Apostle, left vacant by the death of Judas, was filled. Disciples are simply learners, devoted to the teaching and following of a single master. Rabbi’s (teachers) have disciples, John the baptizer had disciples, and Jesus has many many disciples.
The “baptism of repentance” you mentioned sounds like you are speaking of the herald message of John the Baptizer.
“In those days John the Baptist came preaching in the wilderness of Judea, and saying, “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand!” For this is he who was spoken of by the prophet Isaiah, saying: "The voice of one crying in the wilderness: 'Prepare the way of the LORD; Make His paths straight.”(Matthew 3:1-3).
John’s was a message urging repentance (turning away) from ungodliness, and preparing the heart to receive the coming King Messiah, and His Kingdom. This is basically the same message Jesus preached in His ministry so lives would be set in order and hearts would be prepared for the New Covenant Gospel of Salvation that was on the horizon (The Kingdom of God is at hand.)
After Jesus ascended, the gospel spread rapidly, and disciples of Jesus were added to the Church daily. Even so, there remained a large number of disciples of John the baptizer, disciples who had responded to John’s message, and were baptized into his message of repentance and preparation. They resided in Jerusalem, Judea, through Asia and beyond. The professional orator Apollo was among these disciples of John, born at Alexandria, Egypt, an eloquent man and mighty in the Hebrew Scriptures, (Acts 18:24) and he spoke boldly in the synagogue. When Aquila and Priscilla heard him, they took him aside and explained to him the way of God more accurately, (Acts 18:26) they told him of the Gospel message, which He received. When the Apostle Paul came to Ephesus, where Apollo had recently been preaching, he found 12 disciples of John the baptizer to whom he also explained the fuller gospel message.
“And it happened, while Apollos was at Corinth, that Paul, having passed through the upper regions, came to Ephesus. And finding some disciples he said to them, “Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?” So they said to him, “We have not so much as heard whether there is a Holy Spirit.” And he said to them, “Into what then were you baptized?” So they said, “Into John’s baptism.” Then Paul said, “John indeed baptized with a baptism of repentance, saying to the people that they should believe on Him who would come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus.” When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. And when Paul had laid hands on them, the Holy Spirit came upon them, and they spoke with tongues and prophesied. Now the men were about twelve in all.” (Acts 19:1-7)
So, from these accounts you can see there were Jews who did not accept the message of John the baptizer, or the teachings of Jesus. There also were Jews who did receive John’s message of repentance and his call to prepare their hearts for the Kingdom of God and were disciples of John. Among these disciples were some men who would believe John the baptizer, and like John became disciples of Jesus. The pre-resurrection disciples of Jesus also preached the same message of repentance and heart preparation as their master Jesus. But after the Ascension, disciples of Jesus began preaching the fuller new covenant Gospel of Salvation, new life found only in The Messiah.
The message of repentance and heart preparation was a forerunner to the gospel, and through the rite of baptism people publicly declared their allegiance to John’s message and their full intent to continue in repentance and preparing their hearts to receive the Kingdom of God. After Jesus defeated the enemy on The Cross of sacrifice, the partial message was replaced with the fuller message of Good News, the battle has been won, Jesus is risen, God has atoned for the sins of man, Jesus is welcoming men into the Kingdom of His Righteousness.
Hope this helps
KP
(I know there are folks who will read this and then immediately claim I am saying there is no longer any need for repentance. I am NOT saying that, or implying it in any way. I am only presenting what the Bible says. I recognize Individuals derive their own applications from scripture, and I am not intending to argue those idiosyncrasies.)
3 Likes
The gospel of the kingdom for Israel required water baptism. The gospel of grace that God gave Paul for the gentiles only requires being baptized (immersed) into the body of Christ by the Holy Spirit.
Gal 2:7 But contrariwise, when they saw that the gospel of the uncircumcision was committed unto me, as the gospel of the circumcision was unto Peter;
Can you explain what you mean by these two “Gospels”; “The gospel of the kingdom” & “The gospel of grace”?
I don’t see Paul speaking of two gospels in the passage you mention: Gal 2:7, but two audiences; not two different proclamations, but two different recipient groups.
Are you suggesting the Jew required being immersed in water to complete their salvation, but the gentile did not?
KP
2 Likes
The two gospel view is sometimes called mid acts dispensationalism. It looks at the book of Acts as a sort of description of slow a motion failure of Israel to respond to the national gospel of the kingdom. When Paul is called as an apostle to the gentiles he first used his educational background to prove to the Jews in Damascus that Jesus was the Messiah.
In Antioch he did the same. As he went to the Jew first on his first missionary trip, he found that their rejection opened up his bringing a gospel to the gentiles. That this involved not following the Jewish law can be seen in his follow letter to the Galatians. The Jews in Israel the believed in Jesus as Messiah were still following the law.
Paul wrote the Corinthians that Jesus did not send him to baptize which was integral to the kingdom gospel. Israel still had a theoretical possibility to receive the kingdom until the destruction of the temple in 70 AD. The book of Hebrews (written to the Hebrews) was perhaps the last appeal the nation would receive until the tribulation.
The new covenant was to be established with Israel (Jer 31:31) This would entail the being born again of Ezekiel 36 that Nicodemus was supposed to have known. This would entail a supernatural change for the faithful remnant of Israel to enter the kingdom with the law written in their hearts.
That the gentile church would be raptured out of the world so that the kingdom gospel could again be offered to Israel would be expected.
The two gospel perspective solves so many problems faced when trying to make everything fit for us today. We are not required to sell all we own. Not everything we ask for are we given. We already have eternal life and do not have to persevere to the end.
Thank you 
Appreciate all you shared. So how do these passages coincide.
- After John the Baptist Jesus came preaching the good news of the kingdom
- And repentance and forgiveness of sin shall be preached in His name then the end will come
Don’t quote me on my phone going by memory
Mid acts: I studied..but don’t agree that there were 2 different gospels
The Good News
The gospel is: life is avaliable in the kingdom ( after accepting your king by believing who He is) for any one who believes who Jesus is. Why believe ?because He died for Your sins, (went on the front line for you and I) was burried and rose from the dead( showing who He really is for death could not hold Him)
He was seen by many of His resurrection and is now at the right had of the father.
The kingdom was in their midst available to grasp, at hand.
Willard explained that At the end of Acts Paul puts a face to the kingdom.
I do believe we should rightly divide the word…but that does not mean splitting the gosple- as 2 separate news
As to preaching 2 different gospels…
If someone today believed that God could use water to save them and that was their first action of faith, then God would save them through that action of faith…but here’s a thought the action begun in the water or at the intent?
The ultimate key is to be immersed in the presence of the Holy Trinity.
It was said: the kingdom was not eating nor drinking but righteousness, peace and Joy in the Holyghost.
Notes:
Interesting enough even though his first order of business was to free those off under the law. JESUS still healed gentiles before His death.
Also something to think about when it comes to the law: is after a person was healed from whatever disease they had they were to present themselves to the priest …the priest would have to declare Him clean so that He could enter back into his society
Heres a statement to consider: Your faith has made you whole.
Now if by definition: faith is moving in what you say you believe. Is the moving the intent or the physical Action?
Second Question, can you act to seek God until you first received the Spirit…which makes you alive through the hearing of the word. Did Jesus say the words He spoke were Spirit and life?
Even this passage is perplexing…when I believe it was Paul…who was told, what hendereth you, arise and be baptized calling on the name of Jesus.
It’s almost like it had a double meaning. Like 2 fold.
One lord one faith and one Baptism…if baptism means immersion…and there is only one immersion
Its into the reality of the shadows and not the shadow itself.
My last little note: God is not the God of the dead but the living- My thought here is, I wonder if to be immersed into the living you must first be made alive by the hearing of the word with the intention of acting upon what you heard.
So here it was, after Peter Preached they were pricked in the heart, peter told them to repent and be baptized looking to Jesus ( recall the will of the father is that anyone who look to the son and believes will have life and be raised on the last day)
It seems to me that all these done are spiritual action..belief and intent.
In my opinion it might not even have matter what Peter might have thought when He said those words. It was about believing God for a son- so my thought on the interpretation might be. They looked to the son when their intent was to be baptized in His name. So this is where baptism as the shadow meets the reality of the shadow. Coming alive by the word to be immersed into the kingdom. Hence before they died they had to be alive by the Spirit. Thats deep..but @KPuff tell me what you think.
If at all it made any sense?..don’t quote me on any passage they were from my head so I might have missed exact wordings.
Adding some more:
The passage I am thinking about is Did you receive the Spirit by the hearing of faith or by the works of the law.
I believe that One received the Spirit before they died in the water and immersed in the presence of God.
Why? Because- If this Spirit be in you that raised Christ from the dead it will quicken your motal body.
Now look at both these passages
Baptism that saves is the seal of your committment God on the otherside
The death is in the water, the dividing line..if you die you shall live
Now look at this same passage in the old and new and tell me what you think…“The word is in your mouth” I think it’s in Duet…I have to look it up and ill be back…im on my phone…
@KPuff …
Confidential to @Corlove13
To begin with, the Greek word [εὐαγγέλιον], “euangelion” is translated into our English word “gospel”. It is a compound word; “eu” means good or well, and “aggello” means to proclaim or tell. To a first century hearer, it simply means “any good message”, or welcomed good news.” It is the Greek word from which we get our English word “eulogy”, which is generally a good message about a deceased person. It was a common word in the first century, not necessarily a religious word, employed to communicate good news of any kind i.e. “My neighbor brought me “euangelion” that my lost horse had been found”. Also, every time an imperial proclamation was issued announcing a new Roman emperor, it was entitled “Euangelion”! (Good news!). Those who bring good news are called “euangelistēs” (“evangelists”, see i.e. Eph 4:11).
John the Baptist’s, and Jesus’s message that The Kingdom of God is at hand (imminent, very close) was very good news. - AND - the glorious message that death has been defeated, The Kingdom of God is here, that God has provided for human salvation from death, total cleansing from sin, righteousness imputed, all through the sacrificial death and subsequent resurrection of God The Messiah, was, and is extraordinarily good news!
Where euangelion appears in our Bibles our English translators used the word “gospel”. The English word “gospel” derives from an Olde English word “godspiel”, (good story). The Greek word “euangelion” is directly translated as “gospel” 46 times, plus other places the word is qualified as “the gospel of Christ” 11 times, “ the gospel of God” 7 times, “the gospel of the Kingdom” 3 times, as well as miscellaneous other translations in the bible that I use. While there surely are innumerable messages of good news (gospels) there is only one single good news message of Eternal Salvation into The Only Kingdom of God; there are no variations or alternatives. In our Bibles when we read, the gospel of God, the gospel of salvation, the gospel of (Jesus) Christ, the gospel of the grace of God, the gospel of His son, the gospel of peace, the gospel of the glory of Christ, the gospel of your salvation, the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ, the gospel of the blessed God, all refer to the same “euangelion”, the exact same gospel.
Before the price of salvation was completed, while the The Kingdom (of God) was near, but not yet fully realized, “the good news of The Kingdom of God” nearing fulfillment was preached to Jewish audiences, (Think Matt 15:24, & Mark 7:27). Jews were those specifically waiting for the messiah to be sent from God and revealed to the Hebrew nation. It is the same gospel (good news) preached on either side of the actual moment of sacrifice of the savior. It is the same gospel that saves Abraham, Moses, David and all saints who lived before Jesus that saves you and I today. There are not multiple gospels of Salvation; there is only one!
I assume you mean these passages:
"From that time Jesus began to preach and to say, “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.” (Matthew 4:17)
“And Jesus went about all Galilee, teaching in their synagogues, preaching the gospel of the kingdom, and healing all kinds of sickness and all kinds of disease among the people.” (Matthew 4:23)
"Now after John was put in prison, Jesus came to Galilee, preaching the gospel of the kingdom of God, and saying, “The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand. Repent, and believe in the gospel.” (Mark 1:14-15)
And the post resurrected Jesus says of His death and resurrection:
“And He opened their understanding, that they might comprehend the Scriptures.
Then He said to them, “Thus it is written, and thus it was necessary for the Christ to suffer and to rise from the dead the third day, and that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in His name to all nations, beginning at Jerusalem. And you are witnesses of these things. Behold, I send the Promise of My Father upon you; but tarry in the city of Jerusalem until you are endued with power from on high.” (Luke 24:45-49)
The answer is, they are not “coincidental”, but they do speak all of the exact same gospel. The good news of repentance and preparation to the Jew by John the Baptist, the good news of the closeness of The Kingdom of God during the ministry of Jesus, and the good news that God has provided reconciliation all speak of the same work of God, they all speak of the necessity “for the Christ to suffer and to rise from the dead the third day, and that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in His name to all nations,”
I hope this is not too much “answer”. If so, I apologize.
KP
1 Like
Excellent tool for any student of the Scriptures brother @KPuff and would appreciate your review on this, if you have time.
J.
1 Like
Yes, the kingdom through the actions of the Face of Jesus
Back 2 the other post I tagged you In;
16 And now why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord.
…
Whole" Means More Than Physical Healing: While the leper was physically cured, Willard often emphasized that salvation is about the restoration of the whole person—body, soul, and spirit—to a right relationship with God. “Whole” (sozo ) signifies that the Samaritan was not just healed, but brought into a state of shalom/completeness within the Kingdom.
You know what I think…the one who turned back to give thanks was made completely restored…when? When He looked to Jesus for His healing- hence, " your faith has made you whole"
That’s why I believe Paul was baptized when He intended to obey…
LET THE REDEEMED OF THE LORD SAY SO
The Samaritan was saved by his faith How? Certainly not because he was cured of leprosy, (for this was likewise obtained by the rest,) but because he was admitted into the number of the children of God, and received from His hand a pledge of fatherly kindness.
(339) “ Le mot dont a ici use l’Evangeliste est celuy mesme que quasi par tout on tourne, Sauver. ” — “The word which the Evangelist has here employed ( σέσωκε) is the same word which is almost always rendered save. ”
(340) “Une mesme guairison corporelle;” — “the same bodily cure.”
Or “has delivered you”; Grk “has saved you.” The remark about faith suggests the benefit of trusting in Jesus’ ability to deliver. Apparently the Samaritan benefited from the healing in a way the other nine did not.
Luk 17:19 And He said to him, Get up and go on your way. Your faith (your trust and confidence that spring from your belief in God) has restored you to health.
J.
1 Like
@Corelove13
I think I’ve kind-of lost the thread here; I’m no longer sure of what you are getting at, or what point you are making. I’m a little at sea. I can be dense, so pardon me for that, but I can’t figure out what we are trying to clarify together.
What is the subject of our conversation?
• The Baptism of John (repentance), and what it meant?
• Paul’s baptism?
• The Gospel?
• Salvation in Jesus the Messiah?
• Physical vs spiritual healing?
• Faith?
• Or, what are the necessary constituents of salvation?
I’m happy to converse on these topics, but probably only one-at-a-time.
I’m not sure what you mean by “the kingdom through the actions of the Face of Jesus”.
The story of the 10 lepers you referenced, and the one foreigner (Samaritan) who returned to give thanks is another subject all together, I think. I’m not sure what point you are making with this story. Please forgive me.
I’m not sure what you mean by “That’s why I believe Paul was baptized when He intended to obey…”
Physical baptism is a physical temporal picture of an eternal spiritual reality.
Physical healing is also a physical temporal picture of an eternal spiritual reality.
Being baptized in water is a sign. It does not make one saved any more than pretending to hold sticks and play air-drums makes one a musician. Water baptism is an earthly event which can easily be repeated, or renounced. Everyone who physically baths in the water of baptism eventually gets dirty again.
A physical healing is a sign, it points to an eternal reality. Being physically healed does not make anyone spiritually whole any more than a photograph of a pumpkin pie would taste good. Being physically healed does not make you healthy forever. A person could be healed of blindness by Jesus, and break a leg the very next day. Everyone in the Bible who was miraculously healed in their body eventually came to a time where their body was not healed and their body died.
Being baptized in The Holy Spirit is a one-time spiritual reality, registered in heaven, an eternal “overwhelming” which is permanent for eternity. Being made whole by the stripes of Jesus (Isaiah 53:5) is a one-time spiritual reality, registered in heaven, a complete healing which is permanent for eternity. These are the realities to which the pictures (signs) are pointing.
I think we all know this, right?
KP
Compelling and firmly grounded in Scripture, and I must admit that I too momentarily lost my sense of orientation regarding the precise point the member was attempting to articulate.
J.
When Jesus instituted Christian Baptism, the baptism of John ended. So, no, we don’t have any mention of Christians doing what John was doing. John’s baptism was one of repentance, in anticipation for the coming of the Messiah. After our Lord rose, He instituted Baptism in the Name of the Father, Son, and the Holy Spirit. This baptism in Christ’s authority, which is what we find mentioned in Acts 2 when St. Peter says “Repent and be baptized, all of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.”
This is why when St. Paul encountered a group near Ephesus who only knew the baptism of John, he instructed them on the elementary teachings of Christianity, had them receive Christian Baptism, and then laid hands on them (Chrismation).
This is why, historically, from the time of the Apostles onward, basic Christian initiation involved Catechesis (instruction), Baptism, and Chrismation.
The topic of Chrismation is made complicated because Chrismation came to be viewed as a distinct Sacrament in its own right, and in the West due to the peculiarities of practice (in the West only bishops could administer Chrismation) this evolved into Confirmation. Though in the East, this peculiarity never developed, and so Chrismation in the ancient form was retained.
However, in the West, I’d argue the central elements of Chrismation have been retained. E.g. in the Lutheran tradition while Confirmation has been retained as a “churchly rite” that is viewed as serving a helpful purpose, the laying on of hands and application of oil for the receiving of the Holy Spirit is normative to Baptismal practice. When someone is received into the Church through the Sacrament of Baptism, hands are laid upon them, oil is applied, and a prayer to receive the Holy Spirit is prayed. In this, I think, the ancient–and biblical–practice is retained. However in Lutheran dogmatics, Chrismation is not a distinct Sacrament, and it is Holy Baptism that is emphasized as the moment of ordinary conversion (and thus reception of the Spirit). As such we freely and wonderfully confess that even the infant that is baptized has received the Holy Spirit, and has been granted faith by the gracious work of God by the power of the Gospel.
Sola Gratia. Sola Fide.
Acts 19:1-6
Authorized (King James) Version
19 And it came to pass, that, while Apollos was at Corinth, Paul having passed through the upper coasts came to Ephesus: and finding certain disciples, 2 he said unto them, Have ye received the Holy Ghost since ye believed? And they said unto him, We have not so much as heard whether there be any Holy Ghost. 3 And he said unto them, Unto what then were ye baptized? And they said, Unto John’s baptism. 4 Then said Paul, John verily baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying unto the people, that they should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus. 5 When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. 6 And when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Ghost came on them; and they spake with tongues, and prophesied.
1 Like
I think …when I first asked the question I had a thought in mind.
Then a mid acts post came and detered my thoughts and hence I went another direction.
My bad…
But the question was answered. Yes disciples were still preaching John’S Baptism unto repentance. Disciples are followers.
At first my thoughts were:
When Peter preached how they crucified their savior. And they were pricked in the heart…they asked, what must we do? Peter told them repent and be baptized…
So initally I was wondering if Peter preached John’s Baptism to those people.
The answer, textually and historically, is that Peter is not preaching John’s baptism. He is proclaiming Christian baptism grounded in the death and resurrection of Christ.
Let us distinguish carefully, I hope.
The Content of John’s Baptism
John’s baptism was a baptism of repentance in preparation for the coming Messiah. It was forward-looking. John himself says in ~Mark 1:7–8 that he baptizes with water, but the one coming after him will baptize with the Holy Ghost. His ministry was preparatory, not consummative. It anticipated Christ.
The Content of Peter’s Preaching
In Acts 2, Peter is not announcing that the Messiah is coming. He is proclaiming that the Messiah has come, has been crucified, and has been raised. The resurrection is central to his sermon (~Acts 2:24, 32). The cross and resurrection are not background elements; they are the interpretive center of the call to repentance.
That is decisive. John’s baptism could not be grounded in the finished work of Christ, because that work had not yet occurred.
The Explicit Distinction in Acts
The clearest evidence comes later in ~Acts 19:1–6. Paul encounters disciples who had received “John’s baptism.”
He explicitly distinguishes it from baptism “in the name of the Lord Jesus.”
Upon hearing this, they are baptized again, now in Jesus’ name. That narrative makes the distinction undeniable. John’s baptism and Christian baptism are not identical in theological content.
The Formula in Acts 2:38
Peter commands baptism “in the name of Jesus Christ.” That phrase signals identification with the risen Lord and participation in the new covenant reality inaugurated by His death and resurrection. It is covenantal and Christocentric. John’s baptism did not carry that identificational content because the atoning work had not yet occurred.
The Role of the Spirit
Peter also promises the gift of the Holy Ghost. That connects directly to the outpouring of the Spirit at Pentecost. John predicted that the Messiah would baptize with the Holy Spirit. At Pentecost, that promise is realized. Therefore, the baptism Peter commands is situated within the inaugurated messianic age, not within the preparatory ministry of John.
My conclusion, stated analytically:
Premise 1: John’s baptism was preparatory and anticipatory of the coming Messiah.
Premise 2: Peter’s Pentecost sermon proclaims the Messiah as crucified and risen, and commands baptism in His name.
Premise 3: Acts 19 explicitly distinguishes John’s baptism from baptism in the name of Jesus.
Therefore, Peter was not preaching John’s baptism in Acts 2, but Christian baptism grounded in the completed redemptive work of Christ.
J.
I think if He had to tell them to repent, He was doing both.
Even they are still one
Baptism in Paul’s Letters
For Paul, one main purpose of baptism was to counter disunity. Paul emphasizes in his teachings that baptism is to take place “in the name of Jesus.” In 1 Cor 1:12–13, he criticizes the Corinthian church for sectarian devotion to various apostles and leaders: “Each one of you says, ‘I follow Paul,’ or ‘I follow Apollos,’ or ‘I follow Cephas,’ or ‘I follow Christ.’ Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul?” (ESV). For Paul, this form of sectarianism diminished the significance of participating in Christ’s death and resurrection. Through baptism, believers are united with Christ’s death and resurrection and therefore demonstrate that they were created for good works (Eph 2:10).
Paul also speaks of baptism in conjunction with “putting on Christ.” In Gal 3:26–27, he notes, “For in Christ Jesus you are all sons of God, through faith. For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ” (ESV). This comes in the context of Paul describing how the children of Abraham are those who put their faith in Christ, not those born of Jewish descent. Paul’s connection between faith and baptism reinforces the view that the two are intricately related.
Another main purpose of baptism for Paul is its function as an outward manifestation of inward transformation through the death and resurrection of Jesus, inaugurating a new life in obedience to Christ. In Rom 6:4, Paul notes, “We were buried therefore with him by baptism into death, in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, we too might walk in newness of life” (ESV). This verse encapsulates Paul’s argument that those who have been saved through Christ are dead to sin, and the boundless grace of God should not lead to antinomianism. Similarly, in Col 2:11–12, Paul describes baptism as the physical manifestation of putting to death the work of the flesh and being raised to new life through the death and resurrection of Christ.
Baptism in the General Letters
The General Letters continue to develop the theology and practice of baptism, but themes of forgiveness of sins and the connection between inward faith and outward practice continued to have their place. The book of Hebrews contains two specific references to baptism:
-
Heb 6:1–2 suggests that a catechetical process preceded baptism—perhaps instruction on “the difference between Christian baptism and other religious absolutions current at the time” (Wainright, “Baptism,” 110). The use of the plural Greek word “washings” (βαπτισμός, baptismos) to refer to baptism in Heb 6:2 elucidates this view.
-
Heb 10:22 notes, “Let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith, with our hearts sprinkled clean from an evil conscience and our bodies washed with pure water” (ESV).
In 1 Peter, Peter speaks to an audience composed primarily of Gentiles who would have had no understanding of ritual purity. He states, “Baptism … now saves you, not as a removal of dirt from the body but as an appeal to God for a good conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ” (1 Pet 3:21 ESV). For Peter, baptism derives its potency and purpose through the resurrection of Jesus, which enables people to come to faith and receive cleansing from sins.
1 John 5:6–8 may allude to Jesus’ baptism, noting, “This is he who came by water and blood—Jesus Christ; not by the water only but by the water and the blood … For there are three that testify: the Spirit and the water and the blood; and these three agree” (ESV). The water and blood referenced here could possibly be referring to Jesus’ baptism and death, respectively, while the Spirit reference probably alludes to the Spirit’s presence on Jesus’ ministry (John 1:32–34). Another possibility is the blood and water that flowed from Jesus’ pierced side during the crucifixion (John 19:34).
J.