Old Testament Foreshadows of NT Water Baptism

[GWH]

I've seen so many threads on this , so much debated, my question is does it really matter to understand the purpose of it?
To define the exact reason of it.
Our Lord commanded it to be done, that in its self should settle the matter.
I've seen hundreds of post all different in the whys of baptism, then there are some that say its not necessary.
Jesus the son of God...Lord of lord...King of kings sought John the Baptist out for this very reason.... to be baptized.
Now it would surly behoove everyone to be baptized if they indeed want to follow Jesus...but alas some would disagree

Those of us who disagree with your belief that WB is necessary for salvation have good/Scriptural reasons,
and if you have read them it would behoove you to explain a better way to harmonize all of GW on this topic
than our view that optional WB symbolizes essential SB (Acts 2:38, Eph. 4:4-6, 1Cor. 12:13).

IOW, the historical passages in Acts are clarified by the doctrinal passages in the epistles.
Jesus commanded the entire OT law to be done until He fulfilled the OC, thereby setting us free.
Acts was transitional/tween the OC & NC, and the epistles are normative now that the NT is complete (Heb. 7:11-10:1).

 

[God-fearing]

Those of us who disagree with your belief that WB is necessary for salvation have good/Scriptural reasons,
and if you have read them it would behoove you to explain a better way to harmonize all of GW on this topic
than our view that optional WB symbolizes essential SB (Acts 2:38, Eph. 4:4-6, 1Cor. 12:13).

IOW, the historical passages in Acts are clarified by the doctrinal passages in the epistles.
Jesus commanded the entire OT law to be done until He fulfilled the OC, thereby setting us free.
Acts was transitional/tween the OC & NC, and the epistles are normative now that the NT is complete (Heb. 7:11-10:1).

Feeling a little chipper this morning I see......I did not say it was necessary for salvation I said or at least pointed to the fact Jesus thought it necessary and pursued it then commanded it and gave authority to us to do likewise in his commission to us.
You see .....the King has spoken and it should be done.
Some here might be better off to get used to the idea that Jesus is the king and we are brought into a kingdom.
Our king is righteous and true and what he says goes regardless of understanding or not. I think John the Baptist faced this issue also in a suttle way.
Salvation is found in Christ alone its not yours or mine or bobs down the street to obtain it. It is in Christ alone that says you may enter or not or in some cases I never knew you.
Well done my faithful servant enter in is what we all should be striving for.

 

[GWH]

Feeling a little chipper this morning I see......I did not say it was necessary for salvation I said or at least pointed to the fact Jesus thought it necessary and pursued it then commanded it and gave authority to us to do likewise in his commission to us.
You see .....the King has spoken and it should be done.
Some here might be better off to get used to the idea that Jesus is the king and we are brought into a kingdom.
Our king is righteous and true and what he says goes regardless of understanding or not. I think John the Baptist faced this issue also in a suttle way.
Salvation is found in Christ alone its not yours or mine or bobs down the street to obtain it. It is in Christ alone that says you may enter or not or in some cases I never knew you.
Well done my faithful servant enter in is what we all should be striving for.

Yes, I understood you to say that Jesus and Acts commanded WB,
but it appears that you did not understand or agree with how that
harmonizes with Paul's doctrine in Eph. 4:4-6 and 1Cor. 12:13,
so what is needed is your explanation regarding your disagreement
(or double-thinking? )

 

[GWH]

The text for today's sermon included Hebrews 10:1-14, which is relevant for this thread:

"The law is only a shadow of the good things that are coming--not the realities themselves. For this reason it can never...
make perfect those who draw near to worship... Therefore, when Christ came into the world, he said, "Sacrifices and offerings you did not desire"... Then he said, "Here I am, I have come to do your will." He sets aside the first to establish the second. And by that will we have been made holy through the sacrifice of the body of Jesus Christ once for all... By one sacrifice he has made perfect forever those who are being made holy."

This passage refers to the OC (that required obedience to Levitical laws as the condition for forgiveness, cf. Heb. 7:11) being set aside (superseded) by that which it foreshadowed, the second NC (requiring faith in Jesus as Messiah as God's condition for salvation, Heb. 4:2&14, 7:18-22) being established per OT prophecies as the way to be saved (as the saved/saints are being made holy via love and good deeds, Heb. 10:24, cf. Eph. 3:16-19). WB resembles works/circumcision/sacrifices more than it does faith, although it is an apt rite portraying being spiritually buried with Christ/SB if done with immersion.

 

[amazingrace]

So sad.....

Repent, and be baptized for the forgiveness of sin.

Question:

Is one being baptized to have sins forgiven?

OR

Is one being baptized because upon repenting their sins were forgiven?

Try this:

Repent and jump for joy for the forgiveness of sin.

Is one jumping for joy to have their sins forgiven, or because when they repented their sins were forgiven?

This comparison was first offered by Adrian Rogers. One of the best known Southern Baptist Preachers in recent History. He firmly believed and taught that water baptism was NOT required for the forgiveness of sin, but a RESULT of one having their sins forgiven upon repenting and giving ones life to God.

then you remove the purpose of baptism and make it meaningless!

thks

 

[Wansvic]

The text for today's sermon included Hebrews 10:1-14, which is relevant for this thread:

"The law is only a shadow of the good things that are coming--not the realities themselves. For this reason it can never...
make perfect those who draw near to worship... Therefore, when Christ came into the world, he said, "Sacrifices and offerings you did not desire"... Then he said, "Here I am, I have come to do your will." He sets aside the first to establish the second. And by that will we have been made holy through the sacrifice of the body of Jesus Christ once for all... By one sacrifice he has made perfect forever those who are being made holy."

This passage refers to the OC (that required obedience to Levitical laws as the condition for forgiveness, cf. Heb. 7:11) being set aside (superseded) by that which it foreshadowed, the second NC (requiring faith in Jesus as Messiah as God's condition for salvation, Heb. 4:2&14, 7:18-22) being established per OT prophecies as the way to be saved (as the saved/saints are being made holy via love and good deeds, Heb. 10:24, cf. Eph. 3:16-19). WB resembles works/circumcision/sacrifices more than it does faith, although it is an apt rite portraying being spiritually buried with Christ/SB if done with immersion.

This thread reveals OT foreshadows that point to the antitype (real thing) as revealed in the NT.

NT water baptism in the name of Jesus is not an OT command. Therefore, Hebrews 10:1-14 is not applicable to the thread.

And you are mistaken in your belief that water baptism resembles works/circumcision/sacrifices more than it does faith. Faith is the driving factor in one's willingness to be water baptized. Those who actually believe what God says about water baptism obey His command and receive forgiveness of sins in association with Jesus' sacrifice.

 

[Soyeong]

The Old Testament cleansing of a leper and red heifer rituals foreshadow the New Testament command to be water baptized in the name of Jesus for the remission of sins as first commanded in Acts 2:38.

When the Apostles preached baptism, they were using a theological language their Jewish listeners instantly recognized. The architectural, chemical, and ritual elements of those Old Testament shadow-ceremonies map directly onto the mechanics of Christian baptism in several profound ways:

1. The Dynamic Mixture: "Living Water" and Blood
In both the cleansing of the leper and the Red Heifer ritual, water alone was insufficient to cleanse the person. The water had to be paired with an element of sacrifice.
· The Shadow: The leper was sprinkled with a mixture of living (flowing) water and the blood of a slain bird (Leviticus 14:5). The corpse-defiled person was sprinkled with living water mixed with ashes that contained the incinerated scarlet yarn (the symbol of life-blood) (Numbers 19:17).
· The Reality in Baptism: New Testament water baptism is not just a physical bath; it is the spiritual intersection of water and blood. When an individual is immersed in water, they are entering what the Apostle Paul calls a baptism "into His death" (Romans 6:3). The water of baptism applies the cleansing power of the blood Jesus shed on the cross directly to the believer's record, remitting (wiping away) their sin.

2. The Mandate of a Specific "Name" (The Authority)
A crucial component of both Old Testament rituals was the direct application of a specific identity and authority to change a person's legal status.
· The Shadow: The priest had to explicitly declare the leper "clean" using the covenant authority given by God. The ashes of the Red Heifer had to be processed under the direct authority of the High Priest's lineage to have legal weight.
· The Reality in Baptism: In Acts 2:38, Peter commands baptism specifically "in the name of Jesus Christ." In Jewish law, acting in someone’s "name" meant invoking their full legal authority, power, and ownership. Just as the Old Testament priest applied the ritual elements to legally change a person's status from "dead/defiled" to "alive/clean," pronouncing the name of Jesus over the baptismal waters legally transfers the believer into Christ's ownership, legally breaking the power of sin.

· 3. Reversing "Living Death" and Corpse Defilement
The context of who received these Old Testament washings perfectly mirrors why a person needs New Testament baptism.
· The Shadow: Leprosy was a rotting of the flesh while still alive, and touching a corpse made a person a carrier of death. Both conditions were considered a state of "living death"—the physical manifestation of sin's consequences. The rituals completely rolled back this decay, physically resurrecting their social and religious life.
· The Reality in Baptism: The New Testament teaches that before Christ, every human being is spiritually "dead in trespasses and sins" (Ephesians 2:1). Water baptism is the explicit mechanism used to bury that old, rotting life of sin. As Colossians 2:12 states, believers are "buried with him in baptism, in which you were also raised with him through your faith in the working of God."

· 4. Moving "Outside the Camp"
Both Old Testament purification rites required the sacrifice to take place completely outside the borders of human society and sacred spaces.
· The Shadow: The bird for the leper was killed outside the camp. The Red Heifer was led completely outside the camp to be burned.
· The Reality in Baptism: The Book of Hebrews explicitly connects this detail to Jesus, noting that Jesus “also suffered outside the city gate to make the people holy through his own blood” (Hebrews 13:12). When a person submits to water baptism, they are choosing to leave the "camp" of the world and their old life. They align themselves with the rejected Savior who died outside the gates, leaving their sins behind in the water. (AI excerpts)

· Summary: Shadow vs. Reality

Old Testament Shadow (Leviticus 14 / Numbers 19)​	New Testament Reality (Acts 2:38 / Romans 6)​
Living water mixed with blood/scarlet ash	Baptismal water spiritually applying Christ's blood
Sprinkled by the Priest's authority	Immersed in the Name of Jesus Christ
Cleanses physical rotting and corpse defilement	Grants the remission of sins

There were many mikvehs in the Temple area, which is where they were gathering each day (Acts 2:46), and the only way that they would have been able to baptize three thousand people in one day would have been by using them, so they were not inventing something brand new.

 

[GWH]

This thread reveals OT foreshadows that point to the antitype (real thing) as revealed in the NT.

NT water baptism in the name of Jesus is not an OT command. Therefore, Hebrews 10:1-14 is not applicable to the thread.

And you are mistaken in your belief that water baptism resembles works/circumcision/sacrifices more than it does faith. Faith is the driving factor in one's willingness to be water baptized. Those who actually believe what God says about water baptism obey His command and receive forgiveness of sins in association with Jesus' sacrifice.

Actually, it would be more accurate for the OP to say "OT foreshadows of transitional WB", because the gospels and Acts described what happened as divine revelation transitioned from the OC to the NC, which makes Heb. 7:11-10:14 quite appropriate for that thread, and Paul's epistles indicate the correct doctrine (Eph. 4:5, 1Cor. 12:13, Rom. 3:21-5:10).

 

[Wansvic]

There were many mikvehs in the Temple area, which is where they were gathering each day (Acts 2:46), and the only way that they would have been able to baptize three thousand people in one day would have been by using them, so they were not inventing something brand new.

John the Baptist introduced baptisms of repentance which were administered in bodies of water such as the Jordan River. There is no reference to OT mikveh's being used.

It was John's baptism that was later modified to include the name of Jesus in association with His sacrifice. As such, there is no reason to conclude that the NT water baptisms were being administered in mikvehs. The apostolic requirement was sufficient water, faith in Jesus, and obedience to baptism—not the use of a Jewish ceremonial purification facility.

• Matthew 3:13-16: Details Jesus traveling from Galilee to the Jordan River to be baptized by John the Baptist, specifically noting that he "went up out of the water".
• Mark 1:4-5: Mentions crowds from Jerusalem coming to be baptized by John in the Jordan River while publicly confessing their sins.
• John 1:28: Identifies the exact location of John's baptizing ministry as "Bethany on the other side of the Jordan."
• John 3:23: Notes that John the Baptist was baptizing in Aenon near Salim "because there was plenty of water there."
• Acts 8:36–39 The eunuch said, See, here is water; what doth hinder me to be baptized? And he commanded the chariot to stand still: and they went down both into the water, both Philip and the eunuch; and he baptized him. And when they were come up out of the water…

 

[Wansvic]

Actually, it would be more accurate for the OP to say "OT foreshadows of transitional WB", because the gospels and Acts described what happened as divine revelation transitioned from the OC to the NC, which makes Heb. 7:11-10:14 quite appropriate for that thread, and Paul's epistles indicate the correct doctrine (Eph. 4:5, 1Cor. 12:13, Rom. 3:21-5:10).

You are mistaken.

 

[GWH]

You are mistaken.

Possibly; are you possibly mistaken?

 

[Wansvic]

Possibly; are you possibly mistaken?

Just prior to Jesus ascension, He spoke of the NT command that would come forth out of Jerusalem:

"Then opened he (Jesus) their understanding, that they might understand the scriptures,
And said unto them, Thus it is written, and thus it behooved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day:
And that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem.
And ye are witnesses of these things.
And, behold, I send the promise of my Father upon you: but tarry ye in the city of Jerusalem, until ye be endued with power from on high." Luke 24:45-49

And just as prophesied, the NT message Jesus spoke of came forth from Peter in Jerusalem. It was on the Day of Pentecost that Peter first preached the need to repent and be baptized in the name of Jesus for remission of sin.

The same message was carried forth to other nations as recorded in the Word, And continues to be preached even today by those willing to believe Jesus words.

 

[GWH]

Just prior to Jesus ascension, He spoke of the NT command that would come forth out of Jerusalem:

"Then opened he (Jesus) their understanding, that they might understand the scriptures,
And said unto them, Thus it is written, and thus it behooved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day:
And that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem.
And ye are witnesses of these things.
And, behold, I send the promise of my Father upon you: but tarry ye in the city of Jerusalem, until ye be endued with power from on high." Luke 24:45-49

And just as prophesied, the NT message Jesus spoke of came forth from Peter in Jerusalem. It was on the Day of Pentecost that Peter first preached the need to repent and be baptized in the name of Jesus for remission of sin.

The same message was carried forth to other nations as recorded in the Word, And continues to be preached even today by those willing to believe Jesus words.

I agree but admit my understanding might be mistaken. Do you admit the same or think you’re a pope?

 

[God-fearing]

This thread reveals OT foreshadows that point to the antitype (real thing) as revealed in the NT.

NT water baptism in the name of Jesus is not an OT command. Therefore, Hebrews 10:1-14 is not applicable to the thread.

And you are mistaken in your belief that water baptism resembles works/circumcision/sacrifices more than it does faith. Faith is the driving factor in one's willingness to be water baptized. Those who actually believe what God says about water baptism obey His command and receive forgiveness of sins in association with Jesus' sacrifice.

Nonsense

 

[Wansvic]

I agree but admit my understanding might be mistaken. Do you admit the same or think you’re a pope?

There is no mistaking what Scripture reveals when all of the relevant passages are considered together. Its teaching is clear. And, for the record, the pope is the last person I would want to be associated with.

 

[shyamuraix]

(1 Corinthians 10:1) Moreover, brethren, I would not that ye should be ignorant, how that all our fathers were under the cloud, and all passed through the sea;

(1 Corinthians 10:2) And were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea;

(1 Corinthians 10:3) And did all eat the same spiritual meat;

(1 Corinthians 10:4) And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ.

 

[GWH]

There is no mistaking what Scripture reveals when all of the relevant passages are considered together. Its teaching is clear. And, for the record, the pope is the last person I would want to be associated with.

Okay, I understand that reply to mean you also admit that your understanding might be mistaken,
so desire to learn truth and will amend our previous beliefs as soon as new learning warrants.
Humility while TSing is good! (2Thes. 2:10)

 

[Wansvic]

Okay, I understand that reply to mean you also admit that your understanding might be mistaken,
so desire to learn truth and will amend our previous beliefs as soon as new learning warrants.
Humility while TSing is good! (2Thes. 2:10)

Nope. You are wrong again.


Faith comes by hearing and hearing by the Word of God:
And it is written that just prior to Jesus ascension, He spoke of the NT command that would come forth out of Jerusalem:

"Then opened he (Jesus) their understanding, that they might understand the scriptures,
And said unto them, Thus it is written, and thus it behooved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day:
And that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem.
And ye are witnesses of these things.
And, behold, I send the promise of my Father upon you: but tarry ye in the city of Jerusalem, until ye be endued with power from on high." Luke 24:45-49

And just as prophesied, the NT message Jesus spoke of came forth from Peter in Jerusalem. It was on the Day of Pentecost that Peter first preached the need to repent and be baptized in the name of Jesus for remission of sin.

The same message was carried forth to other nations as recorded in the Word, And continues to be preached even today by those willing to believe Jesus words.

 

[shyamuraix]

Nope. You are wrong again.


Faith comes by hearing and hearing by the Word of God:
And it is written that just prior to Jesus ascension, He spoke of the NT command that would come forth out of Jerusalem:

"Then opened he (Jesus) their understanding, that they might understand the scriptures,
And said unto them, Thus it is written, and thus it behooved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day:
And that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem.
And ye are witnesses of these things.
And, behold, I send the promise of my Father upon you: but tarry ye in the city of Jerusalem, until ye be endued with power from on high." Luke 24:45-49

And just as prophesied, the NT message Jesus spoke of came forth from Peter in Jerusalem. It was on the Day of Pentecost that Peter first preached the need to repent and be baptized in the name of Jesus for remission of sin.

The same message was carried forth to other nations as recorded in the Word, And continues to be preached even today by those willing to believe Jesus words.

Hey be nice to GWH.. he's a bit weird and slow, but he seems like good people..

 

[BartholomewB]

Actually, it would be more accurate for the OP to say "OT foreshadows of transitional WB", because the gospels and Acts described what happened as divine revelation transitioned from the OC to the NC, which makes Heb. 7:11-10:14 quite appropriate for that thread, and Paul's epistles indicate the correct doctrine (Eph. 4:5, 1Cor. 12:13, Rom. 3:21-5:10).

In your post #48, what does “transitional water baptism” mean? It seems to imply that spiritual baptism has in some way superseded water baptism. Have I understood you correctly?

If so, what support for that assertion do you find in that first verse, Eph 4:5, which uses the word “baptism” without adding a modifier of any kind? Just plain “baptism.”

And in your third quote, those long extracts from three chapters in Romans, I can’t see the word “baptism” anywhere at all. Is it there?