Is your day going well?

Mine is.

My son, Elijah, and I are recovering from the flu. We both came
down with two different strains over the weekend. He is lagging in
his recovery a bit, but I am back on my feet for the most part. So,
it's a pretty good day.

I appreciate all the feedback folks are giving me. It is helpful to
know what is on your mind. I hope to be of some service to you in
your endeavor to grow in the grace and knowledge of the Lord.

I need you to vote…no, not in the primaries, but in the “Hardest
Question Survey.” More on this below.

*****
Reader Question

“Concerning the baptism of John Mark 1:4 for instance ‘4 John the
Baptist appeared in the wilderness preaching a baptism of
repentance for the forgiveness of sins.' Then in Acts 19 the
Ephesians there had been baptized into John's baptism but then were
baptized into the name of the Lord Jesus. The question, Did the
baptism of John wipe away sins? We have studied this in our bible
study classes as well as at home, and I am sincerely interested in
some views from others.”

Yes and no.

John's baptism could not have washed away sins immediately because
Christ was not yet crucified. It took His perfect sacrifice as the
Lamb of God to take away sins (Jn. 1:29; 1 Pet. 1:18, 19; Eph.
1:7). So what does Mark 1:4 mean?

I take Mark 1:4 to mean the same thing as references in the Old
Testament to the forgiveness of sins. For instance, when you read
Leviticus 4 about the sin offering, it makes reference to
forgiveness (4:20, 26, 31, 35). We know for a fact, however, that
“it is not possible that the blood of bulls and goats could take
away sins” (Heb. 10:4).

The sacrifices in the Old Testament, and specifically the Day of
Atonement, were a reminder of their sins (Heb. 10:3). The
forgiveness was future when the blood of the Son was shed. If the
man or woman was faithful to God's commands, obeying the law under
which he or she lived, then when the perfect sacrifice was made, it
would be applied to them. Notice the Hebrew writer's comments. “And
for this reason He is the Mediator of the new covenant, by means of
death, for the redemption of the transgressions under the first
covenant, that those who are called may receive the promise of the
eternal inheritance” (Heb. 9:15). In other words, the blood of the
Savior went backward to the beginning as well as forward to the end
of time. The blessings of that blood are applied to the faithful of
all time.

So what does this have to do with John's baptism for forgiveness?
It was a future looking forgiveness. Let's say there were men and
women who heard John preach, obeyed, were baptized, and then died
before the time of Acts 2. These people had their sins forgiven
based on their obedience to the preaching of the forerunner.

As for Acts 19 and people being rebaptized after having received
John's baptism; there are two schools of thought. First, everyone
still living that had received John's baptism had to be baptized
again in the name of Christ. Second, only those who received John's
baptism after Pentecost had to be rebaptized in Jesus' name.

Here is the practical point for us: We are not under John's
baptism, never were and never will be. Thus, all we need to be
concerned with is the baptism commanded by Jesus and through His
apostles (Matt. 28:19, 20; Mk. 16:16; Acts 2:38; Rom. 6:3, 4). It
may be interesting to discuss John's baptism and its implications
on the people of the first century, but the practical side of his
baptism is long gone. We are now under the New Testament ratified
by the blood of the Son.
*****

Please go to the following link and voice your opinion about the
hardest question. We had numerous submissions, all good, and now I
want to ask you to help me “rank” them. I really appreciate your
input on this.

Click Here to take survey

All the best,
Steven