questions about John 1:25

[christianmomof3]

I posted this in the history section but got no replies so thought I'd try here to see if anyone knows the answer.

John 1:25 And they asked him and said to him, Why then are you baptizing if you are not the Christ nor Elijah nor the Prophet?

I have some questions about this verse.
Apparantly, John was baptising people in a river.
This was not, to my understanding, a practice of the Jewish religion at that time.
As far as I know, there were ritual baths called Mikvah's, but they were done to oneself and not by anyone to someone else.

So, the first question, was the baptism that John was doing something entirely new to the Jewish people?

Then, the second question - why did they think that because John was baptising people he must have been Christ, or Elijah or the Prophet?
Where did that concept come from?
Is it from somewhere in the Bible or from some writings outside of the Bible?

I did find reference to the prophet in Deuteronomy 18:15- it refers to a Prophet like Moses who will be raised up but that does not mention baptism.

Thank you.

 

[Jazmyn]

"I myself did not know him, but the reason I came baptizing with water was that he might be revealed to Israel.'" (John 1:31)

"I would not have known him, except that the one who sent me to baptize with water told me, 'The man on whom you see the Spirit come down and remain is he who will baptize with the Holy Spirit.'" (John 1:33)

"'John baptized with water, but you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit.'" (Acts 11:16)

Washing with water represented being 'clean'.
Why Did John Baptise People?

"And so John came, baptizing in the desert region and preaching a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins." (Mark 1:4)

"'A person who has had a bath needs only to wash his feet; his whole body is clean." (John 13:10)

 

[wayseer]

John 1:25 And they asked him and said to him, Why then are you baptizing if you are not the Christ nor Elijah nor the Prophet?

So, the first question, was the baptism that John was doing something entirely new to the Jewish people?

The idea of a 'baptism' arose out of the Jewish law which required cleanliness as all flesh was deemed unclean. I think John the Baptist was following on from the cleanliness laws that operated with all Jews. But in doing so John, who was probably a Nazirite, gave the act of 'cleaning' a twist and linked it to the act of repentance - a turning away from old ways and habits.

John was a rebel - he was not conforming to the status quo of his day. He had taken up a position on the Jordan on the eastern edge of the desert. Further to the east lay Jerusalem. It was the habit of those who wished to seek solitude and a sense of God to retire to the desert. They could not help but pass John on their return - heading back to Jerusalem.

I think John might have been alive to the symbolic nature of that journey. Out of the desert (Egypt) across the Jordan (the Red Sea crossing) and on to Jerusalem (the promised land) - and here was John challenging their ideals. Jews would have been alive to the meanings involved and John was effectively telling them in a very vivid way - don't forget who your really are.

Then, the second question - why did they think that because John was baptising people he must have been Christ, or Elijah or the Prophet?
Where did that concept come from?

Good question. I don't know - but I'll have a stab at an answer.

The author of John was writing at the end of the 1st century. The Temple had been destroyed and the Jews scattered out of Jerusalem - those left alive. It was also the time that Christianity was either to make a go of it or fall. So the author had an agenda to demonstrate that Jesus, the Christ, was really the Messiah and by opening his account in this fashion demonstrated the historical significance and the credentials of John by invoking the image of the 'greats' within Judaism. The suspense created in the readers mind is further heighten when John responds that one 'even greater' is about to arrive on the scene. What a great dramatic opening - one that is sure to engage the reader.

 

[Standing Up]

It has to do with the priesthood.

Moses baptized Aaron.

John baptized Jesus Christ.

I'll get more if you're interested.

 

[christianmomof3]

I have not heard of Moses "baptising" Aaron. Where is that concept found?

 

[Standing Up]

I have not heard of Moses "baptising" Aaron. Where is that concept found?

Ex. 29:4 And Aaron and his sons thou shalt bring unto the door of the tabernacle of the congregation, and shalt wash them with water.
Ex. 40:12 And thou shalt bring Aaron and his sons unto the door of the tabernacle of the congregation, and wash them with water.

That was the "start" of the Levitical priesthood.

Christ said, for rightousness sake, baptize Me. He didn't take it upon Himself.

 

[LamorakDesGalis]

Apparantly, John was baptising people in a river.
This was not, to my understanding, a practice of the Jewish religion at that time.
As far as I know, there were ritual baths called Mikvah's, but they were done to oneself and not by anyone to someone else.

Yes, the Mikvahs symbolized cleansing and purification, concepts which go back to the ceremonial laws in the OT. John the Baptist took this practice and concept and added to it. John's baptism was a baptism of repentance and a preparation for the coming Messiah.

So, the first question, was the baptism that John was doing something entirely new to the Jewish people?

Yes and no. Excavations of the Jerusalem temple show Mikvah pools right outside the entrance leading into the temple. It was a common practice, and the most likely place for Peter and the disciples to baptize the 3,000 converts in Acts 2. Besides the Mikvah practice, new Jewish converts were also baptized. So ritual cleansing through water was common. The difference is that John was preaching repentance in light of the coming Messiah, and that he was baptizing "outside" the usual places, in the "wilderness."

Then, the second question - why did they think that because John was baptising people he must have been Christ, or Elijah or the Prophet?
Where did that concept come from?
Is it from somewhere in the Bible or from some writings outside of the Bible?

They thought that because John announced that the Messiah would be coming. That is, coming in the sense of a short period of time, while John was still living. This definitely caught people's attention. At the time, some people thought that John was going to announce himself as the Messiah, which is why they asked the question. John continually denied he was the Messiah and said he was only a forerunner.

As for Elijah, in the book of Malachi (4:5) God said that He will send the prophet Elijah before the day of the Lord. The day of the Lord is associated with the coming of the Messiah. So that is why some people asked John if he was Elijah.


LDG

 

[christianmomof3]

thank you!