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.

href="http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.aspx?sm=_2fdaZZ75Si5JVV_2btnjLng

lg_3d_3d">Click Here to take survey

All the best,

Steven