The christian baptism

Hello everyone

John told the difference between his own baptism, in water, and this of Jesus in spirit and fire

I make the hypothesis part of Jesus's consists in admitting the powerful Messiah could be defeated, and his life depend on men's good will.

According to this hypothesis, the first Jesus baptized would have been John the Baptist, when the latter, after opposition, finally consents to baptize Jesus. Then, the Holy spirit appears, a voice is heard, from God, and John is made able to bear testimony to Jesus.

Indeed,
JB thought and told it was him, JB, that was in need of the christian baptism, and not Jesus of his.
May be was JB in search of a Messiah that wouldn't be in need of him, JB
Because, actually, a Messiah in need of men wasn't fitted to be a Messiah, they thought.

Yes, may be, but
what do they think of a Messiah that'd let men think He is, or He's got the solution of their problems ?

However unbearable might be the question, i wonder yet whether such a Messiah wouldn't mean conforting men into demobilizing themselves ?


It's a deed JB will not follow Jesus, nor will the latter let JB follow him : After Jesus' baptism, JB still looks mobilized with his baptizings in water. Nothing new for him : An ordinary man, diminishing as he himself foretold ; Still no miracle happens through him ; as first baptized and convert (according to my hypothesis), the so called greater of prophets by Jesus will end up preceeding Jesus in death, beheaded, escaping to fall in oblivion in Herod 's prison thanks to Jesus' resurrection. The latter king whose name is only famous thanks to him, John..

Similarly to JB's unwillingness, they could analyse Simon's reproaches to Jesus as Jesus announces his death on the cross, and go on with this analyse up to the coming of the Holy Spirit in the Acts, that looks a bit like the coming of the Holy Spirit at Jesus baptism.


Finally, to conclude
the valuable questions of this thread are :

Is admitting one's oblivion by the world the mark they are true christians (see the anonymous diminishing of JB, from his not following Jesus up to Herod's prison ; see also the pagan share of Jesus' last stuff (his clothes), through their gambling, anonymous as well) ?

Might it be as well, the mark of a frustration of the world ? (chatgpt's answer admitted )

tturt said:

Lost me at

Click to expand...

Hello tturt,
sorry for my not being clear.
i asked chagpt for a summary.
Here it is (not really summarizing, i must admit, but may be clearer) :

The text reflects on the distinction John the Baptist makes between his water baptism and Jesus’ baptism in Spirit and fire. It proposes a hypothesis that part of Jesus’ mission involved accepting vulnerability: a Messiah whose fate depends on human freedom and goodwill, and who can be defeated and killed.

From this perspective, the author suggests that John the Baptist may have been the first person “baptized” by Jesus in a spiritual sense—when John finally consents to baptize Jesus, the Holy Spirit appears, God speaks, and John becomes capable of bearing witness to Jesus. John’s initial reluctance is interpreted as stemming from his expectation of a Messiah who would not need human mediation, since a Messiah dependent on people seemed incompatible with prevailing expectations.

The text questions whether such a vulnerable Messiah might unsettle people—or conversely risk comforting them into passivity by appearing to “solve” their problems for them.

The author notes that after Jesus’ baptism, John continues his own water baptisms and does not follow Jesus. John diminishes, as he foretold, performs no miracles, and ultimately dies before Jesus, executed and largely forgotten except through Jesus’ later resurrection. This pattern is compared to Peter’s resistance to Jesus’ announcement of his crucifixion and to the later coming of the Holy Spirit in Acts, which is likened to the Spirit’s descent at Jesus’ baptism.

The concluding question asks whether acceptance of obscurity and oblivion is a mark of true Christian faith, illustrated by John’s anonymous decline and imprisonment, and by the anonymity of those who divide Jesus’ possessions at the crucifixion.

ChubbyCherub said:

Yeah, this is a no from me. It is not biblical

Click to expand...

Hello CC. Thank you for your reading me
I admit it's not litterally written in the Scriptures. Not sure, yet, it's non compatible