Baptism by water

I'm confused... If water baptism is necessary, then certainly Jesus would have made that clear. So my question is, where and when did the Hebrew tradition of water baptism originate?

Although the term "baptism" is not used to describe the Jewish rituals, the purification
rites in Halakha, Jewish law and tradition, called tvilah, have some similarity to baptism,
and the two have been linked. The tvilah is the act of immersion in naturally-sourced
water, called a mikva. In the past Hebrew Bible and other Jewish texts, immersion in
water for ritual purification was established for restoration to a condition of "ritual
purity" in specific circumstances. For example, Jews who (according to the Law of Moses)
became ritually defiled by contact with a corpse had to use the mikvah before being
allowed to participate in the Holy Temple. source

Old Testament washings were almost always for those of the already believing community. They
symbolized cleansing from sin and guilt. Whereas sacrifices were to atone for acts of sin, washing
or bathing seems generally associated with cleansing from a sinful or otherwise unholy condition.
source
According to the Mishnah, the earliest rabbinic code of law, the mikveh had to be a certain size
and filled with “living” water - water that had not been transferred or transported in, but which
had flowed directly into the bath from a river, spring or rainwater collector.


Jesus' words from John 7:37-38 and John 4:14

Now, that's interesting... The water could not be stagnant.
I wonder how churches with baptismals get around that

“Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born againb he cannot see the kingdom of God.” 4Nicodemus said to him, “How can a man be born when he is old? Can he enter a second time into his mother’s womb and be born?” 5Jesus answered, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God. 6That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.c 7Do not marvel that I said to you, ‘Youd must be born again.’ 8The winde blows where it wishes, and you hear its sound, but you do not know where it comes from or where it goes. So it is with everyone who is born of the Spirit.”

How can we be certain that Jesus was talking about the "water of the womb" here? Is it simply a matter of context and translation?

I've never been baptized, and honestly, I've never felt compelled... To me it feels more like a devotion to a church than to God.

I don't believe Jesus is talking about amniotic fluid there. Amniotic fluid is of the natural and
has nothing whatsoever to do with a Spiritual rebirth There is water (H2O) present in amniotic
fluid, but also electrolytes, proteins, carbohydrates, lipids, phospholipids, urea, and fetal urine.

The Bible uses the word water figuratively to signify both the cleansing properties of the Holy Spirit,
and as a source of power. As Paul says, we are sanctified and cleansed with the washing of water by
the Word. Jesus said, "Whoever drinks of this water will thirst again, but whoever drinks of the water
that I shall give him will never thirst. But the water that I shall give him will become in him a fountain
of water springing up into everlasting life." This water that Jesus speaks of cannot be H2O. Jesus also says:
"If anyone thirsts, let him come to Me and drink. He who believes in Me, as the Scripture has said, out of his
heart will flow rivers of living water." But this He (Jesus) spoke concerning the Spirit, whom those
believing in Him would receive; for the Holy Spirit was not yet given, because Jesus was not yet glorified.


Ephesians 4:5-6

The word water is (sometimes) used as a symbol of the Holy Spirit of God.

Born of water and the Spirit. E.W. Bullinger, in Figures of Speech Used in the Bible, p. 664,
says that in this context we are dealing with a figure of speech called hendiadys, which
literally indicates "one by means of two." In a hendiadys, two words—in this case, "water"
and "spirit"—are employed to get the point across, but only one idea is intended. One of
the words, "Spirit," expresses the point, but the other word, "water," intensifies "Spirit"
to the superlative degree.

It is God's Holy Spirit that is the instrument of both the cleansing and the birth of the divine nature
in us. "Water" intensifies and magnifies "Spirit" by means of the many figurative ways God's Holy Spirit
is shown working: as a means of God's light- and life-giving Word, of spiritual power, and of cleansing.
source

Ahhhhhhh... So, your saying "Holy Spirit" and living water can be interchangeable

So when the scriptures say our Roman Soldier friend stuck Jesus with the tip of his spear and "blood and water" came out- should we think that this was blood and pure, untainted H20?

What I'm getting at is that there is some play with the word "water" and bodily fluids that look like water; that is, unless we think pure water came out of Jesus' guts.

Probably no more than you should think pure H20 comes out of a person when they are "passing water."

Just goes to show "water" does not mean pure H20 at all in many cases.

Ezekiel 36:25-26

Isn't that a specific promise for the Jews at end time?

Baptism in terms of the gospel of Jesus (Mark 1:1) was set up (prepared) in advance of Jesus' arrival (Mark 1:2-3) by John the baptist (Mark 1:4) at the command of God (John 1:6,33). Jesus just incorporated that baptism into his ministry (John 3:22-23, & John 4:1-2) and continued it without change because it's purpose had already been fully set up and established by John at the mouth of God (Mark 1:4, Luke 3:3). Jesus DID declare one change to baptism after he'd made the atonement with his blood. And that change was to begin baptizing IN HIS NAME. (Luke 24:47, 46-49, Matt. 28:18-19) which began to be done in Jerusalem on the day of Pentecost (Acts 2:38).
That's the beginning as far as why it began to be done as a part of the gospel.

But I don't know much about a "Hebrew tradition" aspect.

Love in Jesus,
Kelby

Well, there it is plain as day! That's kinda' hard to argue with...
Been a LONG time since I saw folks gather at the river though

been awhile since we see the church living out much of anything in scripture though honestly

baptism originated from John the Baptist ministry he like Jesus was sent of God to prepare people for Christ and the New Testament but johns ministry hearkens all the way back to Elijah the tishbite.

Jesus mentions "living water" in John 4:10, 14; 7:37-39 and in John 7:38-39, we read - "He who believes in Me, as the Scripture has said, out of his heart will flow rivers of living water. But this He spoke concerning the Spirit. The Holy Spirit is the source of living water and spiritual cleansing. "Water" is used in the Bible as an emblem of the word of God, and in such uses it is associated with cleansing or washing. (John 15:3; Ephesians 5:26) When we are born again, the Holy Spirit begets new life, so that we are said to become "partakers of the divine nature." (2 Peter 1:4) The new birth is brought to pass through "incorruptible seed, by the word of God, which lives and abides forever" (I Peter 1:23) and the Holy Spirit is the Agent who accomplishes the miracle of regeneration. (Titus 3:5)

Amen! If "water" is arbitrarily defined as baptism, then we could just as justifiably say, "Out of his heart will flow rivers of living baptism" in John 7:38. If this sounds ridiculous, it is no more so than the idea that water baptism is the source or the means of becoming born again. So to automatically read "baptism" into John 3:5 simply because it mentions "water" is unwarranted.

“While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word. And they of the circumcision which believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost….

Then answered Peter, Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we? And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord. Then prayed they him to tarry certain days.”
‭‭Acts‬ ‭10:44-48‬ ‭KJV‬‬

would you say Peter is talking about water here ? After they receive the Holy Ghost his first command is for them to get baptized in water

or is this water also figurative ?

“Then Philip opened his mouth, and began at the same scripture, and preached unto him Jesus. And as they went on their way, they came unto a certain water: and the eunuch said, See, here is water; what doth hinder me to be baptized?

And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.

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.”
‭‭Acts‬ ‭8:35-38‬ ‭KJV‬‬

my point is if the apostles and disciples kept baptizing in water teaching this as a seperate event from receiving the gift of the Holy Ghost , why are we debating whether it doesn’t apply or has been replaced ?

“Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins,

and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.

For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call. Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls.”
‭‭Acts‬ ‭2:38-39, 41‬ ‭KJV‬‬

trim of these examples specifically
Mention water there’s no reason for us to say well acts two doesn’t specifically mention water so it’s not talking about water baptism the apostles were t practicing the wrong baptism and Peter specifically commands the Gentiles to be baptized in water after they received the Holy Ghost

Nothing about baptism has changed but for the name one is baptized into

why did they keep baptizing people in water ?

“Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we? And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord. Then prayed they him to tarry certain days.”
‭‭Acts‬ ‭10:47-48‬ ‭KJV‬‬

are you guys saying Peter had it wrong ? Or that he’s not talking about water baptism here ? Or Philip didn’t he get it ?

“And as they went on their way, they came unto a certain water: and the eunuch said, See, here is water; what doth hinder me to be baptized? And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God. 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.”
‭‭Acts‬ ‭8:36-38‬ ‭KJV‬‬

If water baptism no longer applied the apostles wouldn’t have kept making it important peters forst command to the Gentiles was baptism in water , as soon as the eunuch believed what Philip was preaching they went into the water and he was baptized.

of this is true

“There is one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling; one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all.”
‭‭Ephesians‬ ‭4:4-6‬ ‭KJV‬‬

then we either have to say the scripture has this water baptism wrong and the apostles didn’t get it or maybe we should rethink baptism

My church baptizes in the ocean

"... not the removal of dirt from the body, but the pledge of a clear
conscience toward God— through the resurrection of Jesus Christ... "