baptizing 3000

• Messages sorted by:[ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]

Bro. Harrell wrote:
>Depends on the method...could have had everyone get into the river,
>then pronounce the baptism over everyone, and instruct them to 
>submerge themselves completely under water...
>Couldn't that work? Where does it say that there has to be actual
>physical contact to baptize someone?


You may be right on target here, Bro. Harrell. The actual style of
immersion in Jewish baptismal practice was apparently not the same as our
modern "apostolic" form of baptism.

David Bivin and Dr. Roy Blizzard Jr., Christian experts on Hebrew customs,
language and archaeology, give this description of Jewish baptism:

	Immersing oneself was...one of the initiatory rites, along
	with circumcision and sacrifice, performed by proselytes. A man
	(or woman) performing this rite was not physically assisted by
	another person. He walked into the water alone and dipped
	himself. John the Baptist (literally, "the Baptizer") was not
	down in the water with those who were dipping in the Jordan
	River. He was called "the Baptizer" because by exhorting the
	people to repent he caused *them* to get into the water and
	immerse themselves.

This also seems to fit perfectly with the words of Ananias to Paul:

	"And now why tarriest thou? arise and be baptized, and wash
	away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord" (Acts 22:16).

For me, the picture of Jesus' name baptism this creates is of Paul, under
the oversight of Ananias, immersing himself in water and calling to the
Lord Jesus for the remission of his sins.

Cary "Thinks It Would Be Neat to See Someone Baptized This Way Today" Robison