Baptism only for the Jews?

[Chelsea111]

In a discussion today, I was informed that John the Baptist was only baptising Jews, and that Jesus only preached the Gospel for the Jews. Then, during Acts was when Christianity began to spread and became avaliable to everyone. Is this true? I know that Acts is about the conversion of the Gentiles… but I thought John would baptise anyone who wanted it.

My one other question is about the supposed curse in the OT that turned people’s skin black because of sin… where is this and what is the Church teaching on this?

Thanks!

 

[Todd_Easton]

Luke 3:14 suggests that soldiers were among those baptized by John the Baptist. Since Judea was then an occupied country, I think the only soldiers around would have would been Roman soldiers, that is non-Jews.

Jesus told the Samaritan woman, a non-Jew, that he was the awaited Messiah and he seems to have preached to her Samaritan neighbors, in John 4.

Though Jesus said he was “sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel” yet he responded to the faith of the Canaanite woman, a non-Jew, and healed her daughter. (Matthew 15:21-28; Mark 7:23-29.)

 

[Trishie]

Jesus own words show he came not only for the Jews but for all the nations of the earth:

Before His ascension, Jesus said,* “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Go therefore, make disciples of all the nations; baptise them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teach them to observe all the commands I gave you. And know that I am with you always, yes even to the end of time.” *[Matthew 28:17-20]

Then on Pentecost day, “They had all met in one room, when suddenly they heard what sounded like a powerful wind from heaven…and something appeared to them that seemed like tongues of fire; these separated and came to rest on the head of each of them. They were filled with the Holy Spirit.” [Acts 2:2-4] Jesus avowed that,* “Unless a man is born through water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God: what is born of the flesh is flesh; what is born of the Spirit is spirit.” [John 3:5-6] “It is the Spirit that gives life; the flesh has nothing to offer.”* [John 6:63]

“This mystery [of Christ] that has now been revealed through the Spirit to His holy apostles and prophets was unknown to anyone in past generations; it means that pagans now share the same inheritance, that they are parts of the same body, and the same promise has been made to them, in Christ Jesus, through the gospel.” [Ephesians 3:4-7]

 

[Trishie]

As for your other question, I hasten to answer from the Smithsonian :

humanorigins.si.edu/evidence/genetics/skin-color

"Modern Human Diversity - Skin Color

“Why do people from different parts of the world have different colored skin? Why do people from the tropics generally have darker skin color that those who live in colder climates? Variations in human skin color are adaptive traits that correlate closely with geography and the sun’s ultraviolet (UV) radiation.
…
Melanin, the skin’s brown pigment, is a natural sunscreen that protects tropical peoples from the many harmful effects of ultraviolet (UV) rays. UV rays can, for example, strip away folic acid, a nutrient essential to the development of healthy fetuses. Yet when a certain amount of UV rays penetrates the skin, it helps the human body use vitamin D to absorb the calcium necessary for strong bones. This delicate balancing act explains why the peoples that migrated to colder geographic zones with less sunlight developed lighter skin color. As people moved to areas farther from the equator with lower UV levels, natural selection favored lighter skin which allowed UV rays to penetrate and produce essential vitamin D. The darker skin of peoples who lived closer to the equator was important in preventing folate deficiency. Measures of skin reflectance, a way to quantify skin color by measuring the amount of light it reflects, in people around the world support this idea. While UV rays can cause skin cancer, because skin cancer usually affects people after they have had children, it likely had little effect on the evolution of skin color because evolution favors changes that improve reproductive success.”
There is also a third factor which affects skin color: coastal peoples who eat diets rich in seafood enjoy this alternate source of vitamin D. That means that some Arctic peoples, such as native peoples of Alaska and Canada, can afford to remain dark-skinned even in low UV areas. In the summer they get high levels of UV rays reflected from the surface of snow and ice, and their dark skin protects them from this reflected light."

I will point out also that Jesus wasn’t fair haired, fair-skinned, and blue eyed, as His human origins derived from middle eastern nomadic races. Recall that Abraham’s tribe was nomadic. “Genetic studies on Jews show that most Jews worldwide do indeed bear a common genetic heritage which originates in the Middle East, and that they bear their strongest resemblance to the peoples of the Fertile Crescent, with only minor contribution from their host populations%between%” en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jews

 

[beaumains]

J.M.J.
Hi, Chelsea111,

Having looked through the passages that speak of St. John the Baptist, I don’t see any reason to suppose that he only baptized Jews. He preached in Israel and Baptized in the River Jordan, but I haven’t been able to find anything that would indicate that he would turn away truly repentant Gentiles

Actually, there are a couple passages that (to me) seem to suggest otherwise: Lk 3:8 records that when the Pharisees came to him without truly believing, he told them: "Bring forth therefore fruits worthy of penance; and do not begin to say, “We have Abraham for our father. For I say unto you, that God is able of these stones to raise up children to Abraham.”

A little further down, there’s something else that I think is interesting. Lk 3:14 “And the soldiers also asked him, saying: ‘And what shall we do?’ And he said to them: 'Do violence to no man (meaning here, as is translated in other versions, don’t commit extortion); neither calumniate any man; and be content with your pay.”

I think that passage is interesting because I’m fairly certain that the Jews didn’t have soldiers or an army back then. I’d be willing to be shown evidence otherwise, but they were a servile state under the Romans. They couldn’t even execute anyone on their own. They had to go to Pontius Pilate in order to crucify the Lord. So, I think that’s interesting.

No, St. John seems much more interested in the interior disposition of the person than their nationality.

As to your question about the spread of the Gospel to the Gentiles: The Lord Jesus’s mission was to redeem Israel, but not only that. Israel was God’s vessel that would carry Christ to the whole world. A beautiful illustration of this is the prophecy spoken by Simeon when St. Joseph and Our Lady brought Jesus into the Temple to be circumcized. Lk. 2:29-32 “Now Thou dost dismiss Thy servant, O Lord, according to Thy word in peace; because my eyes have seen Thy salvation, which Thou hast prepared before the face of all peoples: a light to the revelation of the Gentiles, and the glory of Thy people, Israel.”

Even before Christ spoke a word, his mission was known to be to the whole world. And don’t forget that the spread of the Gospel to all nations was Christ’s express command, when He told the apostles before ascending to Heaven in Mt 28:19: “Go therefore, and teach ye all nations; baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost.” The great commission.

As for sins turning people’s skin black, that’s certainly the prejudices of the 19th century having their effect on Joseph Smith (since it was a Mormon you were talking to, right?) than it is divine truth. Don’t give a second thought to it.

Pray for this person! Prayer is more important than any apologetics, no matter how thorough and logical you are. I’ll pray for them too.

God bless,

 

[Trishie]

Chelsea, what does the Church say, does it consider any race 'cursed? No, praise God!

msjc.net/MoreInfo/PDF%20Files/JusticeJottings/BishopsOnRacism08.pdf

"Racism is a sin: a sin that divides the human family, blots out the image of God among
specific members of that family, and violates the fundamental human dignity of those called to be
children of the same Father. Racism is the sin that says some human beings are inherently superior
and others essentially inferior because of races. It is the sin that makes racial characteristics the
determining factor for the exercise of human rights. Indeed, racism is more than a disregard for the
words of Jesus; it is a denial of the truth of the dignity of each human being revealed by the mystery
of the Incarnation.

This is the mystery of our Church, that all men and women are brothers and sisters, all one in
Christ, all bear the image of the Eternal God. The Church is truly universal, embracing all races, for it
is "the visible sacrament of this saving unity.”
But each of us as Catholics must acknowledge a share in the mistakes and sins of the past.
Many of us have been prisoners of fear and prejudice. We have preached the Gospel while closing
our eyes to the racism it condemns. We have allowed conformity to social pressures to replace
compliance with social justice. But past mistakes must not hinder the Church’s response to the
challenges of the present.

Let the Church speak out, not only in the assemblies of the bishops, but in every diocese and
parish in the land, in every chapel and religious house, in every school, in every social service agency,
and in every institution that bears the name Catholic. As Pope John Paul II has proclaimed, the
Church must be aware of the threats to humanity and of all that opposes the endeavor to make life
itself more human. The Church must strive to make every element of human life correspond to the
true dignity of the human person.
Racism is not merely one sin among many; it is a radical evil that divides the human family
and denies the new creation of a redeemed world. To struggle against it demands an equally radical
transformation, in our own minds and hearts as well as in the structure of our society. Conversion is
the ever present task of each Christian."

 

[Trishie]

From the Catechism of the Catholic Church

scborromeo.org/ccc/p123a9p2.htm

I. THE CHURCH - PEOPLE OF GOD **
781 "At all times and in every race**, anyone who fears God and does what is right has been acceptable to him. He has, however, willed to make men holy and save them, not as individuals without any bond or link between them, but rather to make them into a people who might acknowledge him and serve him in holiness. He therefore chose the Israelite race to be his own people and established a covenant with it. He gradually instructed this people. . . . All these things, however, happened as a preparation for and figure of that new and perfect covenant which was to be ratified in Christ . . . the New Covenant in his blood; he called together a race made up of Jews and Gentiles which would be one, not according to the flesh, but in the Spirit."201

That is to say, the Church certainly doesn’t see any race as cursed.

Chelsea, I hope that answers your concerns.
God bless you

 

[Trishie]

Jesus own words show he came not only for the Jews but for all the nations of the earth:

Before His ascension, Jesus said,* “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Go therefore, make disciples of all the nations; baptise them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teach them to observe all the commands I gave you.* And know that I am with you always, yes even to the end of time.” [Matthew 28:17-20]

Jesus avowed that,* “Unless a man is born through water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God: what is born of the flesh is flesh; what is born of the Spirit is spirit.” [John 3:5-6] “It is the Spirit that gives life; the flesh has nothing to offer.”* [John 6:63]

“This mystery [of Christ] that has now been revealed through the Spirit to His holy apostles and prophets was unknown to anyone in past generations; it means that pagans now share the same inheritance, that they are parts of the same body, and the same promise has been made to them, in Christ Jesus, through the gospel.” [Ephesians 3:4-7]

 

[jcrichton]

In a discussion today, I was informed that John the Baptist was only baptising Jews, and that Jesus only preached the Gospel for the Jews. Then, during Acts was when Christianity began to spread and became avaliable to everyone. Is this true? I know that Acts is about the conversion of the Gentiles… but I thought John would baptise anyone who wanted it.

My one other question is about the supposed curse in the OT that turned people’s skin black because of sin… where is this and what is the Church teaching on this?

Thanks!

Hi, Chelsea!

The truth of the matter is that Salvation is of the Jews and that Jesus came to the Jews and He sent His disciples ahead of Him to the various territories to which He was to preach the Good News (Salvation). This said… there were minor nuances (some were cited above); this was necessary to have happened because till the Incarnation of the Word Yahweh God had only one nation as His elected child (Abram became Abraham, whose son Isaac became the first barer of the Promise; of whom Jacob was born and Jacob became Israel–God’s first born; the Promise was to Abraham for he would be father of many nations and this Promise would be revealed at the appointed time and it would be in Him (the Messiah) on Whom the Gentiles’ hope would be found for He would unite both the descendants by blood (Abraham’s direct offsprings–Israel) and the descendants by Faith (the rest of the world–those that would Believe in Jesus).

God promised that He would keep a Remnant that would not turn from Him but that the whole of Israel would reject Him; hence, those who were called His people would no longer be His people and those not His people would be His people (check Romans 9:1 thru 11:32)… so you see, the many prophecies could not have been fulfilled if Jesus went out to the world rather than stay within the confounds of Israel (John 1:1-14); yet, even as the promised is fulfilled, Jesus does demonstrate a willingness to embrace those whose Faith was markedly as great or better than that of Israel–the declaration to the Samaritan woman on John 4 signifies a change of worship and a leveled field where both the Jews and the Gentiles will have to worship in Spirit and Truth.

It is this new economy, based on the Incarnate Word, that develops thoughout the Gospels and the Acts of the Apostles… after the Church’s inception, early development of this new economy takes place and the Apostles, guided by the Holy Spirit, begin to give form to the Church’s early Doctrine: we are no longer Jews or Gentiles, men or women, slaves or free… we all belong to Christ as we have been purchased by His Blood so that we, both peoples, become one in Christ!

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[Mintaka]

People in the South in the US tried to associate dark skin with Noah’s curse on Ham and his sons, so that they wouldn’t have to feel so guilty about treating them like dirt.

People in ancient Israel and in Greco-Roman, medieval, and Renaissance times all associated the nations descended from Ham with the Canaanites – in other words, with folks that looked a lot like their Jewish and Middle Eastern neighbors; with the Egyptians - ditto; with the land of Put in ancient Libya - ditto; and with Kush – the Ethiopians, and the only folks in this group who seem to have been much darker than the Israelites.

So yeah, this belief hangs on with total idiots who don’t actually read the Bible, unless they have yet another elaborate rationale to explain why only Kush got “cursed.” (And not all of his kids, either. Seba is Yemen.)

The whole curse thing seems to have been meant to explain why all these related peoples didn’t get to live in Israel, the best place in the world, and why Israel was always fighting bad pagan Canaanites instead of being friends with good monotheistic Canaanites.

 

[Todd_Easton]

My one other question is about the supposed curse in the OT that turned people’s skin black because of sin… where is this …?

Perhaps this is a misunderstanding of Cain’s curse for killing his brother Abel or of the mark God put on him. Genesis 4:11,15.

 

[Chelsea111]

People in the South in the US tried to associate dark skin with Noah’s curse on Ham and his sons, so that they wouldn’t have to feel so guilty about treating them like dirt.

This is exactly the reference that was cited in our discussion. I guess I needed to clarify my questions, although all the answers were pretty helpful.

I was going head-to-head with two LDS priesthood holders, one a Bishop, and I assumed that they knew more scripture than I did. So, although I’d never heard of this curse or thought John only baptised Jews, I had a hard time telling these two confident men that they were wrong. Basically, I was wondering if anywhere in the Bible it actually says that blacks were cursed or John would only baptise Jews.

It looks like I just need to be more confident in myself. Thanks.

 

[Cathoholic]

Hello Chelsea 111.

I think it’s important to keep in mind that John the Baptist’s baptisms were not Christian Baptism.

I think his baptisms were for Jews (and their households) not because of some racism but because this was Old Covenant fulfillment and the Israelite nations were the people of the Old Covenant.

Gentiles (i.e. Cornelius Acts 10, etc.) were included eventually.

I do think there may be racism involved with some of the theological roots of Mormon theology (blacks being cursed, etc.—listen to Tom Smith’s audio series from St. Joseph Communications for more info on this) but LDS or Mormon theology is quite different from the true Gospel.

I have included an excerpt from a Baptism Bible study and hope that it gives you more insight into this issue.

God bless.

Cathoholic

John the Baptist’s Baptisms were NOT Christian Baptism. John the Baptist’s baptisms could not remit or forgive sin but WAS a prefigurement of what was to come with Christian Baptism which DOES remit and forgive sin. Jesus and His Apostles would begin Christian Baptism. Jesus gave us all of the seven Sacraments.

St. John Chrysostom (from approx. 400 A.D. excerpted from St. Thomas’ Catena Aurea) For while as yet the sacrifice had not been offered, nor remission of sin sent, nor the Spirit had descended on the water, how could sin be forgiven? . . .

CCC 523a St. John the Baptist is the Lord’s immediate precursor or forerunner, sent to prepare his way.196 “Prophet of the Most High”, John surpasses all the prophets, of whom he is the last.197 . . .

CCC 720 Finally, with John the Baptist, the Holy Spirit begins the restoration to man of “the divine likeness,” prefiguring what he would achieve with and in Christ. John’s baptism was for repentance; baptism in water and the Spirit will be a new birth.

**
ACTS 19:1-5, 8 ** 1 While Apollos was at Corinth, Paul passed through the upper country and came to Ephesus. There he found some disciples. 2 And he said to them, “Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?” And they said, “No, we have never even heard that there is a Holy Spirit.” 3 And he said, “Into what then were you baptized?” They said, "Into John’s baptism." 4 And Paul said, “John baptized with the baptism of repentance, telling the people to believe in the one who was to come after him, that is, Jesus.” 5 On hearing this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. . . . . 8 And he entered the synagogue and for three months spoke boldly, arguing and pleading about the kingdom of God;

Here is that “Kingdom of God” imagery again associated with Baptism just as we saw in John 3:3-5 (there is also an alluding to the Sacrament of Confirmation too in Acts 19 but is beyond the scope of this study to cover it here—see Confirmation Bible study for more details).

**JOHN 3:3, 5 ** 3 Jesus answered him, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born anew, he cannot see the kingdom of God.” . . . . Jesus answered, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.

John the Baptist baptized with water, not so the recipients receive the Holy Spirit. This is what happens in Christian Baptism, not John’s Baptism.

Well why would John the Baptist bother baptizing then if the world was awaiting Christian Baptism?

John the Baptist carried out Baptisms so Jesus might be revealed to Israel as the Messiah.

JOHN 1:31b . . . but for this I came baptizing with water, that he might be
revealed to Israel."

**Pope St. Gregory The Great **(from approx. 500 A.D. excerpted from St. Thomas’ Catena Aurea) John baptizes not with the Spirit but with water, because he had no power to forgive sins; he washes the body with water, but not at time same time the soul with pardon of sin. . . . . Why then does he baptize who could not remit sin, but that he may preserve in all things the office of forerunner? As his birth had preceded Christ’s birth, so his baptism should precede the Lord’s baptism.

Well why then did John the Baptist bother baptizing anyone but Jesus?

Why didn’t he merely Baptize Jesus ONLY? Because it would be confusing for the people. Then the people would be saying John the Baptist’s baptism is greater than Jesus’ Baptism and that John the Baptist is the Messiah (some thought this anyway—that’s why John the Baptist vehemently said in John 1:20: “He confessed, he did not deny, but confessed, “I am not the Christ.””).

**
St. Augustine **(from approx. 400 A.D. excerpted from St. Thomas’ Catena Aurea) Or, he baptizes, because it was fitting Christ to be baptized. But if indeed John was sent only to baptize Christ, why was not He alone baptized by John? Because had the Lord alone been baptized by John, there would not have lacked who should insist that John’s baptism was greater than Christ’s, inasmuch as Christ alone had the merit to be baptized by it.

More on this concept of the different natures of John the Baptist’s baptism compared to Christian Baptism in Baptism Bible study III.

 

[Chelsea111]

John the Baptist’s Baptisms were NOT Christian Baptism. John the Baptist’s baptisms could not remit or forgive sin but WAS a prefigurement of what was to come with Christian Baptism which DOES remit and forgive sin. Jesus and His Apostles would begin Christian Baptism.

So basically all John’s baptisms meant was the coming of the savior and fullfilling of the OT covenants, right? Whereas Christian Baptism forgives sin, gives the gift of the Holy Spirit and begins a life in Christ. That’s what I perceived from your post, however, one quote confuses me: CCC 720 says “John’s baptism was for repentance”…?
Anyway, thanks for that–I’d read that part of Acts, but your post definitely shed some new light on those passages.

 

[FCEGM]

So basically all John’s baptisms meant was the coming of the savior and fullfilling of the OT covenants, right? Whereas Christian Baptism forgives sin, gives the gift of the Holy Spirit and begins a life in Christ. That’s what I perceived from your post, however, one quote confuses me: CCC 720 says “John’s baptism was for repentance”…?. .

Chelsea, the baptism performed by John is that it is “a unique baptism in the desert in view of the repentance and pardon (Mk 1:4p). . .The baptism of John set up only a provisional economy: it is a baptism of water which is preparatory to the Messianic baptism in the Holy Spirit and fire,” Xavier Leon-Dufour, Dictionary of Biblical Theology. It was an external ritual signifying an effort of conversion of the baptized (much as many Protestant denominations look upon baptism today).

 

[PJM]

=Chelsea111;8216469]In a discussion today, I was informed that John the Baptist was only baptising Jews, and that Jesus only preached the Gospel for the Jews. Then, during Acts was when Christianity began to spread and became avaliable to everyone. Is this true? I know that Acts is about the conversion of the Gentiles… but I thought John would baptise anyone who wanted it.

My one other question is about the supposed curse in the OT that turned people’s skin black because of sin… where is this and what is the Church teaching on this?

Thanks!

Salvation was orginally planed and OFFERED to the Jewish nation. They failed to respond to God’s call and the period of GRACE, so while Christ was still alive; [Before Paul’s call and Minisrty], Jesus withdraws the exclusive offer to the Jewish Nation and extends it ALL Nations.

So yes, John Baptized PRIMARILY Jews, but would not have denined others who choose to be Baptized.

These two verses verifiy this:

Luke 19: 38-44 [37] "As he [Jesus] was now drawing near, at the descent of the Mount of Olives, the whole multitude of the disciples began to rejoice and praise God with a loud voice for all the mighty works that they had seen, saying, “Blessed is the King who comes in the name of the Lord! Peace in heaven and glory in the highest!” And some of the Pharisees in the multitude said to him, “Teacher, rebuke your disciples.” He answered, “I tell you, if these were silent, the very stones would cry out.” **And when he drew near and saw the city[JERUSALEM] he wept over it, **[42] saying, "Would that even today you knew the things that make for peace! [Salvation] But now they are hid from your eyes. For the days shall come upon you, when your enemies will cast up a bank about you and surround you, and hem you in on every side, and dash you to the ground, you and your children within you, and they will not leave one stone upon another in you; because you did not know the time of your visitation." Jerusalem was wiped out, most were killed or taken into salvery. This was in 70 A.D. by the Romans.

NOTE: This did not, DOES NOT preclue Individual Jews from salvation who did recogonize and serve Christ.

And here Jesus speaking to Peter and the Eleven Apostles: Matt. 28:19-20

" Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, to the close of the age."

God Bless,
Pat

 

[Big_Dummy]

You are dealing with a theological system known as Dispensationalism. In short, they divide the Bible into eras, Before Matthew 28, the news of the kingsom was preached only to Isreal. Reality will throw a wrench into this thinking. You need only show that there were righteous gentiles durling the life of Jesus on earth. Since, there were righteous genitiles it is reaonsable to think at least one came out to be baptized by John. And, I seriously doubt John would turn away anyone who was repenting of their sins to follow God.

Luke 7
2And a certain centurion’s servant, who was dear unto him, was sick, and ready to die.

9When Jesus heard these things, he marvelled at him, and turned him about, and said unto the people that followed him, I say unto you,** I have not found so great faith, no, not in Israel. **

Acts 10:22
And they said, Cornelius the centurion, a just man, and one that feareth God, and of good report among all the nation of the Jews, was warned from God by an holy angel to send for thee into his house, and to hear words of thee.

PS to refute dispensationalism, look for books on Covenant theology.

 

[Big_Dummy]

Genesis 9:26
And he said, Blessed be the LORD God of Shem; and Canaan shall be his servant.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ham_(son_of_Noah

google.com/#sclient=psy&hl=en&source=hp&q=curse+ham+bible&aq=f&aqi=g1&aql=&oq=&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.&fp=64480e3e283e02ba&biw=1024&bih=524

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curse_and_mark_of_Cain

Genesis 4:15
And the LORD said unto him, Therefore whosoever slayeth Cain, vengeance shall be taken on him sevenfold. And the LORD set a mark upon Cain, lest any finding him should kill him.

Short claim, Slave owners claimed that the Mark on Cain was black skin. And, because of the sin of Ham against Noah, Noah put a curse on the Cainites to be servants(slaves) to justify owning slaves.

Refutation,

1. The mark was for protection, not degrading Cain.
2. Genesis 4 does not say what the mark was, and it does not say it was skin color.
3. All mankind are of “one blood”

Acts 17:26
And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation;