F
fuerzaddios
Guest
Why was John able to baptize in the Jordan if, from what I read in John 1:25, he wasn’t authorized to do so since he was neither the Christ, nor Eli’jah, nor the prophet?
- Status
H
Hodos
Guest
John was fulfilling his commission given to him from God. Check out Jesus’ take on this in Matthew 21:23-27.
B
BartholomewB
Guest
That was the objection that the Pharisees raised. John didn’t recognize their authority. He told them he didn’t need their approval.
Last edited:
F
fuerzaddios
Guest
Oh wow! I hadn’t paid attention to this. So, it’s pretty much fulfilling Isaiah’s prophecy but wasn’t stopped by the Pharisees because of fear of the people?
H
Hodos
Guest
I think Isaiah and Ezekiel both contain prophecies that could be interpreted as baptism. That being said, in the account in Matthew 21 the Pharisees and chief priests ask Jesus by whose authority he clears the temple, teaches, and speaks out against the Pharisees, Sadducees, Herodians, and Scribes. Jesus knows he does his action under God’s authority, but also knows the Jewish leaders would never admit this publicly since they are trying to discredit him publicly. Jesus then uses his rhetorical question which reflects their questioning of his authority. The key thing here is that Jesus is directly correlating John’s ministry to bring people to repentance and baptism and to point to Christ as the coming Messiah, to Christ’s own ministry. If we believe that Christ is sent by God, which was the explicit message of the Gospel writers, then by extension, so is John’s ministry. The only difference is that looking at it from the perspective of your question, I have reversed Jesus argument. In his day, all the people accepted that John was in fact a prophet on its face.
Last edited:
D
Dan_Defender
Guest
He came in the Spirit of Elijah so that was good enough 
T
thistle
Guest
John did not baptise to forgive sins. His baptism was for repentance.
- Status