The Baptist ?

[monti]

Why that is after reading that John the Baptist’s parents were said to be “blameless” and seemingly from good stock, why is that John believed he was in need of baptism? He was after all the son of a priest, and he was the immaculately conceived messenger of god?

 

[Pegg]

Why that is after reading that John the Baptist’s parents were said to be “blameless” and seemingly from good stock, why is that John believed he was in need of baptism? He was after all the son of a priest, and he was the immaculately conceived messenger of god?

because even the very best of us are still sinners and imperfect and condemned to death.

All who are born from Adam & Eve have inherited their imperfection. Adam became imperfect when he sinned, and all who are born from him carry that imperfection and therefore we sin.

1John 1:8  If we make the statement, “We have no sin,” we are misleading ourselves and the truth is not in us


“Through one man sin entered into the world and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because they had all sinned—.”
Romans 5:12

 

[Kilgore Trout]

Why that is after reading that John the Baptist’s parents were said to be “blameless” and seemingly from good stock, why is that John believed he was in need of baptism? He was after all the son of a priest, and he was the immaculately conceived messenger of god?

Schizophrenia and psychosis have a way of transcending reason.

 

[monti]

All who are born from Adam & Eve have inherited their imperfection. Adam became imperfect when he sinned, and all who are born from him carry that imperfection and therefore we sin.

Well you see, I have problem with this because John was of immaculate conception. not of ADAM. And Jesus must have trusted john to baptise him because the gospels tell us John baptised jesus the so called son of god?
And what is more we should apply the same question about jesus , he was the son of god also immaculately conceived. So what sins had either of these two boys committed for them to both believe they were in need of baptism?
So what you stated above has to be wrong according to the scriptures.

 

[Pegg]

Well you see, I have problem with this because John was of immaculate conception. not of ADAM. And Jesus must have trusted john to baptise him because the gospels tell us John baptised jesus the so called son of god?
And what is more we should apply the same question about jesus , he was the son of god also immaculately conceived. So what sins had either of these two boys committed for them to both believe they were in need of baptism?
So what you stated above has to be wrong according to the scriptures.

he wasnt of immaculate conception. His aged mother and father had their procreative powers restored. It was a similar situation to Abraham and Sara who had a child (Isaac) in their old age....God made it possible for them to have a child.

Apparently, immaculate conception means to be conceived free of sin...thats what catholics claim about Mary. I've never heard anyone claim John the Baptist was conceived in such a way. But thats not surprising seeing the bible doesnt make that claim.


Jesus was the only one who was conceived without a human father. He was born without sin because his father was God, not Adam.

 

[FunctionalAtheist]

Jesus was the only one who was conceived without a human father. He was born without sin because his father was God, not Adam.

Who was Adam's father?

 

[Pegg]

Who was Adam's father?

Adams father was God

But after Adam turned away, he became a sinner by rebelling against Gods law. And from that point on, all of his children were likewise born in that state of imperfection.

Hence why Jesus is the only other human to be born on this earth without sin. Jesus did not have a human father, like Adam, he was created perfect, but unlike Adam, he didnt rebel.

 

[ChristineES]

Why that is after reading that John the Baptist’s parents were said to be “blameless” and seemingly from good stock, why is that John believed he was in need of baptism? He was after all the son of a priest, and he was the immaculately conceived messenger of god?

If you study our religion a little more, you will find out that no one outside of God is considered "Holy", so to speak, in our faith. So although Jesus said that John The Baptist was the best human ever born, he was still a human and imperfect.

 

[FunctionalAtheist]

Adams father was God

But after Adam turned away, he became a sinner by rebelling against Gods law. And from that point on, all of his children were likewise born in that state of imperfection.

Hence why Jesus is the only other human to be born on this earth without sin. Jesus did not have a human father, like Adam, he was created perfect, but unlike Adam, he didnt rebel.

One thing that bothers me about this, I always hear 'free will' invoked, and stated such that 'we' have a choice to sin or not. Yet the same people will then say something like what you have, that Adam sinned and so we all are sinners.

How are these not contradictory? Do I have free will to choose not to sin?

 

[monti]

Jesus was the only one who was conceived without a human father. He was born without sin because his father was God, not Adam.

Ok, I'll come back to the Baptist.
So why did Jesus feel the need to be baptised, if he was sinless?
And then who baptised John?
(1)

immaculate conception means to be conceived free of sin.

Who said?
(2)

His aged mother and father had their procreative powers restored

How do you know this?

I've never heard anyone claim John the Baptist was conceived in such a way.But thats not surprising seeing the bible doesnt make that claim

The bible doesn’t claim what you have claimed at 1&2 above either does it, Pegg?

 

[monti]

So although Jesus said that John The Baptist was the best human ever born, he was still a human and imperfect.

And your evidence for this is what exactly, Christine?

 

[thau]

Why that is after reading that John the Baptist’s parents were said to be “blameless” and seemingly from good stock, why is that John believed he was in need of baptism? He was after all the son of a priest, and he was the immaculately conceived messenger of god?

Who said they were "blameless" and what does that mean anyway?

Where is it suggested that John the Baptist was immaculately conceived? I never heard that one? I know the Virgin Mary was immaculately conceived and without sin, but none other, save for Jesus of course.

John sinned. John doubted. Still highly regarded.

 

[psychoslice]

probably because John taught the outer and Jesus the inner, even though many cannot see the inner that Christ taught, or represented.

 

[ChristineES]

And your evidence for this is what exactly, Christine?

Here is the verse that says it.
Matthew 11:11 Truly I say to you, Among the sons of women there has not been a greater than John the Baptist: but he who is least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he. (This is the BBE translation)

 

[Pegg]

One thing that bothers me about this, I always hear 'free will' invoked, and stated such that 'we' have a choice to sin or not. Yet the same people will then say something like what you have, that Adam sinned and so we all are sinners.

How are these not contradictory? Do I have free will to choose not to sin?

the imperfection we are born with is genetically inherited. Just as a father passes on his physical traits, he also passes on his mental traits.

When Adam sinned, he lost perfection and could not pass perfection onto any of his children. Thats what it means that we are born imperfect and sinful.

We have the tendency toward sin. It doesnt mean that we have to sin or we are willful sinners...it just means that we are 'prone' to it. And that is why some humans were called 'blameless' even though they were still in the imperfect state and still prone to sin. We can fight the urge to sin, but we cannot remove the urge to sin.

 

[Pegg]

Ok, I'll come back to the Baptist.
So why did Jesus feel the need to be baptised, if he was sinless?
And then who baptised John?
(1)

There is no scripture which says that John was baptised...so im not sure why you think someone must have baptised him.

The purpose of baptism by John was as a symbol of repentence of sins. And when Jesus came to John to be baptised, John objected saying "why are you coming to be baptised when it is I who needs to be baptised by you"

John was a prophet and he knew who Jesus really was. He knew Jesus was sinless and that he was the Messiah. He knew Jesus had nothing to repent of and we can clearly see that by Johns reaction to Jesus request to be baptised. So the only conclusion is that Jesus baptism was in symbol of something else, not of repentance.

And the answer is found in what Jesus began to do after being baptised.

Who said?
(2)

The New Catholic Encyclopedia (1967, Vol. VII, pp. 378-381) acknowledges regarding the origin of the belief: “*.*.*. the Immaculate Conception is not taught explicitly in Scripture .*.*. The earliest Church Fathers regarded Mary as holy but not as absolutely sinless. .*.*. It is impossible to give a precise date when the belief was held as a matter of faith, but by the 8th or 9th century it seems to have been generally admitted. .*.*. [In 1854 Pope Pius IX defined the dogma] ‘which holds that the most Blessed Virgin Mary was preserved from all stain of original sin in the first instant of her Conception.’” This belief was confirmed by Vatican II (1962-1965).—The Documents of Vatican II (New York, 1966), edited by W. M. Abbott, S.J., p. 88.

How do you know this?

Luke 1:5  In the days of Herod, king of Ju·de′a, there was a priest named Zech·a·ri′ah of the division of A·bi′jah. His wife was from the daughters of Aaron, and her name was Elizabeth. 6 They both were righteous before God, walking blamelessly in accord with all the commandments and legal requirements of Jehovah. 7 But they had no child, because Elizabeth was barren, and they both were well along in years.
8 Now as he was serving as priest in the assignment of his division before God, 9 according to the established practice of the priesthood it became his turn to offer incense when he entered into the sanctuary of Jehovah. 10 And the entire multitude of the people were praying outside at the hour of offering incense. 11 Jehovah’s angel appeared to him, standing at the right side of the incense altar. 12 But Zech·a·ri′ah became troubled at the sight, and he was overcome with fear. 13 However, the angel said to him: “Do not be afraid, Zech·a·ri′ah, because your supplication has been favorably heard, and your wife Elizabeth will bear you a son, and you are to name him John. ...18 Zech·a·ri′ah said to the angel: “How can I be sure of this? For I am old, and my wife is well along in years.” 19 In reply the angel said to him: “I am Ga′bri·el, who stands near before God, and I was sent to speak with you and to declare this good news to you. ...23 When the days of his holy service were completed, he went off to his home.
24 Some days later Elizabeth his wife became pregnant,

 

[monti]

Who said they were "blameless" and what does that mean anyway?

And they were both righteous before God, walking blamelessly in all the commandments and statutes of the Lord.Luke 1:5-25

I can only assume “blameless” means without sin.

Where is it suggested that John the Baptist was immaculately conceived? I never heard that one?

It is suggested in Luke 1:1-25.

It appears to be the same scenario in the case of Jesus’ mother some 3 months later. Angel appears , speaks of a baby to be born and disappears.

I know the Virgin Mary was immaculately conceived and without sin, but none other, save for Jesus of course.

I have found nothing in the biblical scriptures that state that Mary was “without sin” and what is more, it is debateable whether or not they were married at the time of Mary’s conception but only betrothed (engaged).
Example;

"Joseph, son of David," he said, "don't be afraid to take Mary as your wife, because what has been conceived in her is from the Holy Spirit.”Mathew 1:20. NIV..

So Mary isn’t quite the good wife “without sin” after all, depending on which bible one decides to take as truth. Or is it just a case of the believer cherry picking the bible, the chapter and the verse that suites their beliefs?

 

[monti]

Here is the verse that says it.
Matthew 11:11 Truly I say to you, Among the sons of women there has not been a greater than John the Baptist: but he who is least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he. (This is the BBE translation)

I don’t see anything in that verse that states the Baptist was a sinner or had sinned.

 

[monti]

There is no scripture which says that John was baptised...so im not sure why you think someone must have baptised him.

I see, so, it was Ok for John to go around baptising people to cleans them of their sins and calling them to repent, when he hadn’t been baptised himself. Sounds a bit hypercritical one would think.

The purpose of baptism by John was as a symbol of repentence of sins. And when Jesus came to John to be baptised, John objected saying "why are you coming to be baptised when it is I who needs to be baptised by you"

Yes very puzzling that one Pegg, I must say. So we have to ask why didn’t Jesus baptize the sinner John "the greatest prophet" and cleans him of his sins?

John was a prophet and he knew who Jesus really was. He knew Jesus was sinless and that he was the Messiah.

Two things are wrong with your statement here Pegg, (if we are going to go by the scriptures)
John didn’t know who Jesus was.

I myself did not know him. John 1:33

Indeed John it is said, had to wait for a sign to point out to him who this man was.( A dove we are told).
(2) John had serious doubts about the divinity of Jesus and if or not he was a Messiah.

And John calling unto him two of his disciples sent them to Jesus, saying, Art thou he that should come? or look we for another? John 7:19

This is very puzzling don’t you think Pegg?. It all seems a bit late in the day one would think to start having doubts about Jesus’ Messiah-ship. He had after all seen the sign of the dove, hadn’t he?
More puzzling! The idea of baptism is to cleanse one of their sins. But here you say “Jesus was sinless”. So why did Jesus feel the need to be baptised? And we have to keep in mind that the baptism of Jesus is not really recorded as an eye witness account of what happened at the river, John is making his statement (testimony) after the fact:

Then John gave this testimony: “I saw the Spirit come down from heaven as a dove and remain on him.And I myself did not know him, but the one who sent me to baptize with water told me, ‘The man on whom you see the Spirit come down and remain is the one who will baptize with the Holy Spirit.’ I have seen and I testify that this is God’s Chosen One.”John 1:32-34. NIV

He knew Jesus had nothing to repent of and we can clearly see that by Johns reaction to Jesus request to be baptised. So the only conclusion is that Jesus baptism was in symbol of something else, not of repentance.

More guess-work and assumption on your part then.

The New Catholic Encyclopedia (1967, Vol. VII, pp. 378-381) acknowledges regarding the origin of the belief: “*.*.*. the Immaculate Conception is not taught explicitly in Scripture .*.*. The earliest Church Fathers regarded Mary as holy but not as absolutely sinless. .*.*. It is impossible to give a precise date when the belief was held as a matter of faith, but by the 8th or 9th century it seems to have been generally admitted. .*.*. [In 1854 Pope Pius IX defined the dogma] ‘which holds that the most Blessed Virgin Mary was preserved from all stain of original sin in the first instant of her Conception.’” This belief was confirmed by Vatican II (1962-1965).—The Documents of Vatican II (New York, 1966), edited by W. M. Abbott, S.J., p. 88.

Well that above just tells me that these early church fathers simply made it all up as they went along and or when a problem arose.They were well known for it. Indeed I believe I have read somewhere (in all my years of research) that it was Pope Pious X who said:

The myth of Christ has served us well

and pope Leo X is said to have remarked:

"How well we know what a profitable superstition this fable of Christ has been for us and our predecessors."

It was a while back so don't hold me to the exact quotes..

 

[Pegg]

I see, so, it was Ok for John to go around baptising people to cleans them of their sins and calling them to repent, when he hadn’t been baptised himself. Sounds a bit hypercritical one would think.

he wasnt cleansing people of their sins... he was baptising 'in symbol of repentance from sins' is what the gospel writers state.

Yes very puzzling that one Pegg, I must say. So we have to ask why didn’t Jesus baptize the sinner John "the greatest prophet" and cleans him of his sins?

Jesus didnt perform any baptisms. He instructed his disciples to baptise people in his name and they in turn were to go and preach and baptise more people who would do the same thing.
John, on the other hand, was sent for the specific purpose of preparing Isreal for the Messiahs arrival...the purpose of his baptism was fulfilled when his disciples became Jesus disciples.

Two things are wrong with your statement here Pegg, (if we are going to go by the scriptures)
John didn’t know who Jesus was.

Indeed John it is said, had to wait for a sign to point out to him who this man was.( A dove we are told).
(2) John had serious doubts about the divinity of Jesus and if or not he was a Messiah.

John was informed at the time God chose to inform him.

John 1:25 So they questioned him and said to him: “Why, then, do you baptize if you are not the Christ or E·li′jah or the Prophet?” 26 John answered them: “I baptize in water. One is standing among you whom you do not know, 27 the one coming behind me, the lace of whose sandal I am not worthy to untie.” 28 These things took place in Beth′a·ny across the Jordan, where John was baptizing.
29 The next day he saw Jesus coming toward him, and he said: “See, the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world! 30 This is the one about whom I said: ‘Behind me there comes a man who has advanced in front of me, for he existed before me.’ 31 Even I did not know him, but the reason why I came baptizing in water was so that he might be made manifest to Israel.” 32 John also bore witness, saying: “I viewed the spirit coming down as a dove out of heaven, and it remained upon him. 33 Even I did not know him, but the very One who sent me to baptize in water said to me: ‘Whoever it is upon whom you see the spirit coming down and remaining, this is the one who baptizes in holy spirit.’ 34 And I have seen it, and I have given witness that this one is the Son of God.”

This is very puzzling don’t you think Pegg?. It all seems a bit late in the day one would think to start having doubts about Jesus’ Messiah-ship. He had after all seen the sign of the dove, hadn’t he?

Isreal had seen the waters of the red sea part so that they could cross on dry land...it didnt stop some from doubting did it?

John was an imperfect man, he was prone to the same shortcomings as anyone else. While he was in prison, he sought confirmation from Jesus...there's nothing bad about that, but I think you have to understand the situation for John at the time. His enemy had him in prison and was about to kill him...John would have been under stress perhaps he even wondered if Jesus was the Messiah, when would be break the roman yolk and get him out of jail.
But Jesus time to take action was not until a long way off in the future.

More puzzling! The idea of baptism is to cleanse one of their sins. But here you say “Jesus was sinless”. So why did Jesus feel the need to be baptised? And we have to keep in mind that the baptism of Jesus is not really recorded as an eye witness account of what happened at the river, John is making his statement (testimony) after the fact:

Baptism does not cleanse one from sins. It didnt cleans Isrealites who got baptised...it merely symbolised their own repentance in preparation for the Messiah as prophesied

Malachi 3:2 “Look! I am sending my messenger, and he will clear up a way before me. And suddenly the true Lord, whom you are seeking, will come to his temple; and the messenger of the covenant will come, in whom you take delight. Look! He will certainly come,” says Jehovah of armies.


Isaiah 40:1 “Comfort, comfort my people,” says your God.
*2 “Speak to the heart of Jerusalem,
And proclaim to her that her compulsory service has been fulfilled,
That her guilt has been paid off.
From the hand of Jehovah she has received a full amount for all her sins.”
*3 A voice of one calling out in the wilderness:
“Clear up the way of Jehovah!
Make a straight highway through the desert for our God.

Well that above just tells me that these early church fathers simply made it all up as they went along and or when a problem arose.They were well known for it. Indeed I believe I have read somewhere (in all my years of research) that it was Pope Pious X who said:

and pope Leo X is said to have remarked:

It was a while back so don't hold me to the exact quotes..

thankfully, its not the church 'fathers' who wrote the bible or who were selected by Christ to record his teachings.

The church 'fathers' were quite corrupt and lacking in faith...as many of them still are today.