Quote:
Originally Posted by Grymir  Goodmorning y'all! Just a couple of quick things before I go into work. I'll catch up and answer follow-ups after work. (which could be late, I have to set up for a formal diner tomorrow).
Heb ch 9 doesn't say anything about baptism, only relating Jesus sacrifice to the whole OT Temple system.
The law that Jesus was fulfilling in His (John's) baptism wasn't any of the 'rituals' of the high priest, but his (John's) command to repent and be baptized. John wasn't a high priest, so he couldn't do them either. (If he was the high priest, why were the Pharisee's castigating him?)
I'm not saying that sprinkling isn't valid, esp if there isn't enough water. But I'm trying to grasp the connection to 'ritual washings'. Hence my theology behind it question. Because y'all are saying it's not in the Bible, when the Bible talks about going under the water, but it is sufficiently vague to allow sprinkling, if not enough water. It's the buried with him in baptism that's more clear than the ritual washing connection.
Thanks y'all for input - Grymir |
OK.
First re-read ch 9 of Hebrews. The chapter is about the old ordinences of the eathly sanctuary being replaced. In the AV it calles the baptisims "divers washings". Do a greek look up, the word is baptismos. The author then goes on & refers to several of these baptisims. From memory I can recall the baptism of the book & the people, a sin offering baptism, and I know there is at least one other.
Hebrews 9 is ALL ABOUT BAPTISM! Any Hebrew that read the letter would know that immediatly. We miss it because we don't know the Levitical law.
Second re-read the gospels on the baptism of John & the baptism of Jesus. John refused to give Jesus the "baptism of repentence". He relented when Jesus asked to be baptised for another reason, to fullfil the law (i.e. for righeousness sake).
Are you really saying that Jesus needed a "baptism of repentance"?!?! Of what sin was Jesus repenting? Think about what you are saying for a second.
Also please remember who Johns father was. And what he was doing when the angel appeared to him to anounce the coming birth of John?
A high priest is, at the same time, an annual office AND a class or order of priests. Zacharius, & John his son, are both hereditary high priests. At any given time there could be hundreds of living "high priests"(!), but only one was THE "high priest" at a time.
Most of your mis-understanding seems to come from a limited knowledge of the OT practices & procedures, IMHO.