Do Mormons realize that baptism is never metioned in the Old Testament?

[sefton]

it strikes me as rather profound that in the entire Old Testament there is not a single reference, mention, or description of baptism, when according to the Mormon church, baptism has been a vital and central part of the gospel since Adam and Eve. To be fair, isn't it a huuuge stretch (to say the least) to suggest that the Jews in the Old Testament, who were extreeeemely strict with following all the laws and practices that were commanded of God, would somehow leave out one of the most crucial central beliefs in over a thousand pages over a period of about a thousand years? or to suggest perhaps that someone edited out every single reference in every biblical text and no one noticed?

id like to further note that no where in the New Testament does it reference or explain that people in the times of the Old Testament practiced baptism. the only 2 references that the New Testament gives to baptism in the Old Testament are from 1 Cor 10 and 1 Peter 3; both of which use the idea of baptism from the Old testament only symbolically to show that the great flood and the passing through and collapse of the Red Sea foreshadowed the coming of baptism:

1 Corinthians 10:1-2 "For I do not want you to be ignorant of the fact, brothers, that our forefathers were all under the cloud and that they all passed through the sea. They were all baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea."

1 Peter 3: 20-21: "...who disobeyed long ago when God waited patiently in the days of Noah while the ark was being built. In it only a few people, eight in all, were saved through water, and this water symbolizes baptism that now saves you also—not the removal of dirt from the body but the pledge of a good conscience toward God. It saves you by the resurrection of Jesus Christ."

how can you wrap your mind around the idea that baptism was of extreme importance thoughout the entire Old Testament, yet no references exist?

Edited March 10, 2009 by sefton

[lusciouschaos]

The fact that Christ thought it was important to be baptized is good enough for me. No need to wrap my mind around whether or not baptism was important in the Old Testament.

Are you concerned about the lack of references to animal sacrifice in the Ensign?

[Connie]

The below is from the LDS Bible Dictionary:

BIBLE DICTIONARY

Baptism

From a Greek word meaning to dip or immerse. Baptism in water is the introductory ordinance of the gospel, and must be followed by baptism of the Spirit in order to be complete. As one of the ordinances of the gospel, it is associated with faith in the Lord Jesus Christ, repentance, and the laying on hands for the gift of the Holy Ghost. Baptism has always been practiced whenever the gospel of Jesus Christ has been on the earth and has been taught by men holding the holy priesthood who could administer the ordinances. Although there is some obscurity in the Bible as to the antiquity of baptism before the time of Jesus, from latter-day revelation it is clear that Adam was baptized (Moses 6: 64-68) and that the patriarchs and prophets since his time have taught the gospel and administered the ordinances that pertain to the gospel. This includes both water baptism and the laying on of hands for the Holy Ghost (Moses 8: 23-24). The Book of Mormon shows also that baptism was taught and practiced long before the coming of Jesus Christ (2 Ne. 31; Mosiah 18: 8-17). In the N.T. Paul speaks of the children of Israel being baptized by Moses “in the cloud and in the sea” (1 Cor. 10: 1-4). Noah and Abraham are spoken of as “preachers of righteousness,” which means they taught the gospel and administered its ordinances (Gal. 3: 8; Heb. 4: 1-2; 2 Pet. 2: 5; cf. Moses 8: 23-24).

Baptism symbolizes death, burial, and resurrection, and can only be done by immersion. It is clear that John the Baptist and Philip baptized in that manner (Matt. 3: 16; Acts 8: 37-39; Rom. 6: 1-6; Col. 2: 12; D&C 20: 72-74; D&C 128: 12-13). Any other method is not baptism.

We learn from latter-day revelation, which confirms the teaching in the Bible, that the Aaronic Priesthood has authority to baptize with water, whereas the Melchizedek Priesthood has power to baptize not only with water but also to confer the Holy Ghost (D&C 13; JS-H 1: 68-72). We note also that John the Baptist, who had the Aaronic Priesthood, recognized this distinction and used it to illustrate one of the differences between his mission and the mission of Jesus, who had the priesthood of Melchizedek (Matt. 3: 11; Mark 1: 8; Luke 3: 15-16; John 1: 25-33; cf. Acts 8: 5-25).

Baptism is not optional if one wishes the fullness of salvation. Jesus said a person must be born of water and of the Spirit (John 3: 3-5). When he sent the twelve apostles forth to teach the gospel he told them that whosoever believed and was baptized would be saved; and whosoever did not believe would be damned (Mark 16: 16). Jesus himself was baptized “to fulfill all righteousness” (Matt. 3: 15; 2 Ne. 31: 4-11). But the Pharisees, being unwilling to accept the gospel “rejected the counsel of God against themselves, being not baptized” (Luke 7: 30).

Baptism in water has several purposes. It is for the remission of sins, for membership in the Church, and for entrance into the celestial kingdom; it is also the doorway to personal sanctification when followed by the reception of the Holy Ghost.

The age at which baptism should be administered is not specified in the Bible, although it is evident that candidates were to be old enough to be capable of belief and have some understanding. In latter-day revelation we learn that the Lord has set the age at eight years as the time when a person begins to become accountable and can be baptized (D&C 20: 71; D&C 68: 25-28). This was also the age given in O.T. times (JST Gen. 17: 11).

Baptism is a most sacred ordinance, which a person, having received it, can remember throughout life as a reminder of the personal commitment to Jesus Christ. Its symbolism is beautiful, and its consequences ever so desirable. John the Baptist had the signal honor among all men to take the Son of God into the water and baptize him, after which he saw the Holy Ghost descend upon Jesus. By being baptized Jesus obeyed the law himself, and set the example for all mankind.

[Traveler]

it strikes me as rather profound that in the entire Old Testament there is not a single reference, mention, or description of baptism, when according to the Mormon church, baptism has been a vital and central part of the gospel since Adam and Eve. To be fair, isn't it a huuuge stretch (to say the least) to suggest that the Jews in the Old Testament, who were extreeeemely strict with following all the laws and practices that were commanded of God, would somehow leave out one of the most crucial central beliefs in over a thousand pages over a period of about a thousand years? or to suggest perhaps that someone edited out every single reference in every biblical text and no one noticed?

id like to further note that no where in the New Testament does it reference or explain that people in the times of the Old Testament practiced baptism. the only 2 references that the New Testament gives to baptism in the Old Testament are from 1 Cor 10 and 1 Peter 3; both of which use the idea of baptism from the Old testament only symbolically to show that the great flood and the passing through and collapse of the Red Sea foreshadowed the coming of baptism:

1 Corinthians 10:1-2 "For I do not want you to be ignorant of the fact, brothers, that our forefathers were all under the cloud and that they all passed through the sea. They were all baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea."

1 Peter 3: 20-21: "...who disobeyed long ago when God waited patiently in the days of Noah while the ark was being built. In it only a few people, eight in all, were saved through water, and this water symbolizes baptism that now saves you also—not the removal of dirt from the body but the pledge of a good conscience toward God. It saves you by the resurrection of Jesus Christ."

how can you wrap your mind around the idea that baptism was of extreme importance thoughout the entire Old Testament, yet no references exist?

Can you wrap your mind around the idea that baptism is a Greek word and that no one during the time of the Old Testament spoke Greek? Therefore, the symbology was different? The concept that you have missed is that baptism is the frist covenant between G-d and man to become a citizen or saint in G-d's kingdom. It is most foolish of you to assume that no man made covenant with G-d in Old Testament times.

The Traveler

[bytor2112]

Why do you suppose John the Baptist was baptizing people?

From Mark:

4 John did baptize in the wilderness, and preach the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins.

[sefton]

Can you wrap your mind around the idea that baptism is a Greek word and that no one during the time of the Old Testament spoke Greek? Therefore, the symbology was different? The concept that you have missed is that baptism is the frist covenant between G-d and man to become a citizen or saint in G-d's kingdom. It is most foolish of you to assume that no man made covenant with G-d in Old Testament times.

The Traveler

gosh where do i start. 1st, Jews in the time of the new testament also didnt use the word baptism; the word they used would be translated to us as "to immerse" and no where in the Old Testament does it use words from any translations to describe this immersion. 2nd, i dont believe in God in the 1st place. and 3rd, according to the Old Testament, there are coventants between God and man, such as circumcision, but NOT baptism--you would think that such a covenant would be noted in the Old Testament if it existed. (and yes, the word circumcision comes from a Latin word which people in the times of the Old Testament did not know, yet it is still translated, explained, and named in the Old testament). anyway, the fact remains that in the OT there is not even a subtle description of anything similar to what mormons consider baptism

[sefton]

Why do you suppose John the Baptist was baptizing people?

From Mark:

4 John did baptize in the wilderness, and preach the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins.

according to biblical scholars, John the Baptist is widely regarded to have been raised an Essene and left their community. The Essenes were a sect of Jews who started to popularize the practice of baptism in their time.

[sefton]

Why do you suppose John the Baptist was baptizing people?

From Mark:

4 John did baptize in the wilderness, and preach the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins.

according to biblical scholars, John the Baptist is widely regarded to have been raised an Essene and left their community. The Essenes were an unconventional sect of Jews around the time of Jesus who were initiated through baptism. it makes sense that John would have continued this practice after he left the Essene sect

[bytor2112]

The New Testament itself points us back to numerous Old Testament passages, in order to teach us about baptism. The apostle Peter said that Noah’s flood was a type of baptism. The apostle Paul said that the Israelites were actually baptized during the exodus from Egypt. The apostle John and the author of Hebrews each recognized that the ceremonial purifications of the Old Testament were baptisms. The idea of “baptism” was not remotely new to the New Testament church. There had already been many baptisms in Israel’s history and practice, and so we must seek to understand these baptisms first, if we truly wish to understand the significance of baptism in the New Testament.

In the New Testament, the apostle Peter points back to Genesis 6-9. Noah was righteous, so Noah and his family received a type of baptism. And in 1 Peter 3:20-22, he tells us that New Testament baptism “corresponds to this”.

In the New Testament, the apostle Paul points back to Exodus 14-15. God remembered the descendants of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Righteous Moses now led these people. And God baptized all two million of them, infants and all. Before the baptism, God strictly required circumcision. But after the baptism, God allowed all the Israelites to go 40 years without circumcision.

In the New Testament, the author to the Hebrews points back to numerous Old Testament ceremonial cleansings and purifications, and calls these “baptisms”. The apostle John also draws a link between OT purifications and NT baptism. One of these OT purifications is found in Leviticus 12, in which purification (baptism) was performed when babies were newly born. The birth of a girl necessitated 80 total days of purification (baptism). But the birth of a boy, due to his circumcision, reduced the length of baptismal purification by 40 days.

In the New Testament, the apostle Paul draws an explicit link between heart circumcision and baptism. It matters not whether we view the baptism in Colossians 2:11-12 as water baptism, Spirit baptism, or both. If water baptism is in view, then Paul is merely saying that water baptism points to heart circumcision, just like physical circumcision pointed to heart circumcision; thus we would expect each ordinance to apply to the same subjects . But if Spirit baptism is in view, then Paul is simply saying that heart circumcision corresponds to Spirit baptism. And if the realities themselves are parallel, then it follows that the physical administration of the signs should also be parallel.

And of course, we also see John’s baptism in the New Testament, we see baptism by the Holy Spirit, and we see water baptism in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Many people only focus on these baptisms. But in this article, we have already covered much Biblical ground concerning baptism, which is logically prior to determining what happened in New Testament water baptism. And with all of this information in mind, we need to ask some questions:

v Is it logical to assume that the institution of New Testament water baptism completely ignored all of the Old Testament precursors?

v Does it make sense to assume that Peter affirmed baptisms only for individuals, rather than for entire family households, in light of his explicit statements in 1 Peter 3?

v It is sensible to assume that there is no link between circumcision and baptism in Colossians 2:11-12, especially in light of the other Biblical evidence linking the two rites?

Ø Even when we look in the New Testament for baptism, we find many passages that point us back to the Old Testament.

Ø We cannot say that the Old Testament types of baptism are irrelevant to the church, because the apostles Peter and Paul specifically tell us that they are relevant.

Ø Colossians 2:11-12 is not the only passage of Scripture which links circumcision and baptism. The Israelite exodus and the Leviticus 12 purification ceremony each point us to the same truth, as well. (Not to mention the obvious fact that physical circumcision pointed to heart circumcision, which is just another term for “regeneration”.)

Furthermore, close looks at the Noahic and Israelite baptisms reveal a covenantal, federal headship approach to baptism, rather than an individualistic approach. And the multiple links between circumcision and baptism further solidify this covenantal tie. So, even though this project began simply by observing numerous explicit New Testament references to baptism, we end up at the same place where many other baptismal articles begin: with the covenant.

--- Article by Joseph M. Gleason - Semptember, 2005

Edited March 11, 2009 by bytor2112

[Justice]

2nd, i dont believe in God in the 1st place.

You don't believe in God and you're worried about baptism not appearing the Old Testament?

I would think you would be more worried about who Jesus Christ was, since He claimed to be the Son of this God you don't believe in.

Who do you think He was?

Let me interject.

I have heard it said by some that He was a "good teacher and did many good deeds, and a good person." Well, also, if He wasn't the Son of God, He also happened to be a liar. "Good person" and "liar" sound a bit contradictory to me.

I would re-direct my focus if I were you. :)

[L_and_P21]

my question is have you come here to bash or to learn? if it is to bash please save your time and ours, study it out for yourself. if it is to learn please read and learn of our beliefs to understand us better and not to criticize.

there is no reason to mock a religion because it differs from yours. yes i am aware that members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints do this but no one is perfect. It doesnt mean you should. Do as Christ did and take the higher road.

[applepansy]

Prior to Christ being born (Old Testament times) they offered blood sacrifice. When Christ came (New Testament time) He set the example by being baptized and then HE paid for all our sins by sacrificing Himself for us. All he asked of us is to be baptized in His name and to repent of our sins. This is the first of the covenants we make.

Baptism is important. It is how we accept the sacrifice Christ made for each of us.

applepansy

[sefton]

my question is have you come here to bash or to learn? if it is to bash please save your time and ours, study it out for yourself. if it is to learn please read and learn of our beliefs to understand us better and not to criticize.

there is no reason to mock a religion because it differs from yours. yes i am aware that members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints do this but no one is perfect. It doesnt mean you should. Do as Christ did and take the higher road.

if i was intending on mocking your beliefs i would take an entirely different approach and it would be obvious. i was raised mormon and this is something i never got an answer to so im asking.

and i think there are things to learn from everyone

Edited March 11, 2009 by sefton

[L_and_P21]

if you were raised as a member then you should know that we believe there there were "plain and precious truths" taken out of the bible. new and old testament. also i would recommend reading the Pearl of Great Price. specifically the book of Moses chapter 6:64-67. talks about Adam being baptized.

[Book_of_Mormon_Warrior]

Apparently, our guest is unaware of ceremonial cleansing mikvahs in the OT, a practiced still honored by Orthodox Jews. When Christ came, baptism in His name become the one and only mikvah we need... "one faith, one baptism".

I like turtles.

[sefton]

if you were raised as a member then you should know that we believe there there were "plain and precious truths" taken out of the bible. new and old testament. also i would recommend reading the Pearl of Great Price. specifically the book of Moses chapter 6:64-67. talks about Adam being baptized.

even if it were possible, why would people at the time of the Great Apostasy take out all mentions of baptism in the Old Testament, but not from the New Testament?

[Connie]

If you did not read my post of what the bible dictionary says, please go back and read it. And then, i second the notion, go read Moses 6. This is where God teaches Adam about baptism, so read the whole chapter. Moses 6

Moses 6

64 And it came to pass, when the Lord had spoken with Adam, our father, that Adam cried unto the Lord, and he was caught away by the Spirit of the Lord, and was carried down into the water, and was laid under the water, and was brought forth out of the water.

65 And thus he was baptized, and the Spirit of God descended upon him, and thus he was born of the Spirit, and became quickened in the inner man.

66 And he heard a voice out of heaven, saying: Thou art baptized with afire, and with the Holy Ghost. This is the record of the Father, and the Son, from henceforth and forever;

[bytor2112]

even if it were possible, why would people at the time of the Great Apostasy take out all mentions of baptism in the Old Testament, but not from the New Testament?

Did you bother to read the article I posted?

[sefton]

Apparently, our guest is unaware of ceremonial cleansing mikvahs in the OT, a practiced still honored by Orthodox Jews. When Christ came, baptism in His name become the one and only mikvah we need... "one faith, one baptism".

I like turtles.

lol, ceremonial cleansing mikvahs are and always have been entirely different from mormon baptism.

[L_and_P21]

mis-translations, not really meaning to take it out but did. to "prove" their religion to be the right one. only God knows. but this is where faith comes in. sometimes we wont know the answers until later. we can only speculate as to why

[livy111us]

The Old Testament does not have the word "baptism"It does have words with similar meanings, such as "rachatz", translated as ‘wash’, which

the Hebrew definition is a ‘moral cleansing’ (Isa. 1:16) also Isa. 48:1 (compare to 1 Nephi 20:1)

and in John 1:25, the Pharisees talked about it as if they were expecting the Messiah to baptize,

so it would have been a familiar ordinance in order to recognize it. See also Jer. 4:14, Ez. 36:25,

Zech. 13:1, J.S.T. of Mat. 9:18-21. Also, the Pharisees performed a form of baptism called

"miq-veh" in Hebrew, it was by immersion and cleansed sin. Christ refers to the "baptism of John" rather than simply to "baptism" (Matt 21:25) implying recognition of the concept by his hearers. This same language is repeated in Acts ("John's baptism -" Acts 19:3, also referred to as the "baptism of repentance.")

We read in the legends of the Jews that 2 days prior to the Lords revelation at Mount Sinai the ordinance

of baptism was imposed upon all the children of Israel. (The Legends of the Jews, 3:88)

"According to rabbinical teachings, which dominated even during the existence of the [Jerusalem]

Temple...baptism...was an absolutely necessary condition to be fulfilled by a proselyte to Judaism."

(Jewish Encyclopedia, 2:499)

[sefton]

If you did not read my post of what the bible dictionary says, please go back and read it. And then, i second the notion, go read Moses 6. This is where God teaches Adam about baptism, so read the whole chapter. Moses 6

Moses 6

64 And it came to pass, when the Lord had spoken with Adam, our father, that Adam cried unto the Lord, and he was caught away by the Spirit of the Lord, and was carried down into the water, and was laid under the water, and was brought forth out of the water.

65 And thus he was baptized, and the Spirit of God descended upon him, and thus he was born of the Spirit, and became quickened in the inner man.

66 And he heard a voice out of heaven, saying: Thou art baptized with afire, and with the Holy Ghost. This is the record of the Father, and the Son, from henceforth and forever;

i read the Bible Dictionary text on Baptism before my original post. and im not sure you realize that the book of Moses is not in the Old Testament

[Book_of_Mormon_Warrior]

lol, ceremonial cleansing mikvahs are and always have been entirely different from mormon baptism.

Do you understand what a "type and shadow" is?

[Book_of_Mormon_Warrior]

The Old Testament does not have the word "baptism"It does have words with similar meanings, such as "rachatz", translated as ‘wash’, which

the Hebrew definition is a ‘moral cleansing’ (Isa. 1:16) also Isa. 48:1 (compare to 1 Nephi 20:1)

and in John 1:25, the Pharisees talked about it as if they were expecting the Messiah to baptize,

so it would have been a familiar ordinance in order to recognize it. See also Jer. 4:14, Ez. 36:25,

Zech. 13:1, J.S.T. of Mat. 9:18-21. Also, the Pharisees performed a form of baptism called

"miq-veh" in Hebrew, it was by immersion and cleansed sin. Christ refers to the "baptism of John" rather than simply to "baptism" (Matt 21:25) implying recognition of the concept by his hearers. This same language is repeated in Acts ("John's baptism -" Acts 19:3, also referred to as the "baptism of repentance.")

We read in the legends of the Jews that 2 days prior to the Lords revelation at Mount Sinai the ordinance

of baptism was imposed upon all the children of Israel. (The Legends of the Jews, 3:88)

"According to rabbinical teachings, which dominated even during the existence of the [Jerusalem]

Temple...baptism...was an absolutely necessary condition to be fulfilled by a proselyte to Judaism."

(Jewish Encyclopedia, 2:499)

High Five!

[Book_of_Mormon_Warrior]

lol, ceremonial cleansing mikvahs are and always have been entirely different from mormon baptism.

Oh, and did I mention...

I like turtles.