tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3500036.post5416471526437957552..comments2024-01-02T04:49:16.658-05:00Comments on He Lives: Things I think about BaptismDavidhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08688240424047203541noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3500036.post-27681453883762264332017-11-25T06:27:42.974-05:002017-11-25T06:27:42.974-05:00Hank Mike,
IMO, John's baptism was from Heaven...Hank Mike,<br />IMO, John's baptism was from Heaven, but it was no longer sufficient following Christ's finished work. You could not be baptized into the Christian faith until Christianity was "finalized" with the resurrection. And afterwards, you should be baptized into the fullness of the faith.Davidhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08688240424047203541noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3500036.post-19945116901895365632017-11-23T23:35:29.314-05:002017-11-23T23:35:29.314-05:00Have you heard, or thought on the significance of ...Have you heard, or thought on the significance of the baptisms reported as performed under the authority of the Lord Jesus by His disciples in John 3:22,26; 4:1,2?<br /><br /> In his work, "The Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah", Alfred Edersheim suggests that the Lord's authorization of those baptisms was His personal testimony to the heavenly source of "the baptism of John." He was, in effect, continuing John's work seeing that John would soon be ending his assigned ministry.<br /> The Lord Himself, by being Himself baptized by John, and then by authorizing His disciples to baptize, was answering beforehand His later question to the Pharisees: "The baptism of John, whence was it? from Heaven, or of men?"<br /> How does that idea strike you?<br />Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04929743757718431466noreply@blogger.com