who baptized john the baptist?

[Shazz]

Im hearing things like "a angel did it", "When he was born", "he never was just had the authority"

[OneEternalSonata]

This brings up a point I've never thought before. The bible says, referring to John the Baptist, in Luke 1:15:

"For he shall be great in the sight of the Lord, and shall drink neither wine nor strong drink; and he shall be filled with the Holy Ghost, even from his mother's womb."

I'm lead to wonder if baptisms happen in premortality, or if the order of the ordinances performed isn't vital(much as my first impressions say otherwise), or perhaps for another reason altogether. After all, as LDS we subscribe to the belief that temple work is possible. However, I wonder if he wasn't baptized when he performed his first baptism, much as Alma was in the Book of Mormon.

Mosiah 18:14-- And after Alma had said these words, both Alma and Helam were buried in the water; and they arose and came forth out of the water rejoicing, being filled with the Spirit.

Then we have Matthew 3:14-- "But John forbad him, saying, I have need to be baptized of thee, and comest thou to me?" Two ways one could look at this are that John was never baptized or because his knowledge of who Jesus really was led him to exclaim in this manner. It is open to much interpretation.

Unfortunately, I know of no official doctrine or standpoint that the Church has made concerning John and his water baptism.

Edited January 20, 2010 by OneEternalSonata
Expanded my thoughts

[bytebear]

There is no record that I know of. But as I understand it, he was a Levite so he had the authority without needing ordination. And you do not need to have been baptized to receive the authority to baptize, as evidenced by the authority given to Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdry to baptize each other.

[Just_A_Guy]

D&C 84:28 tells us he was ordained by an angel at the age of eight days. Of course, "angel" can be a generic term for a church leader (see, e.g., the opening chapters of the Book of Revelation); so "angel" in this context may refer to John's own father.

I wonder whether, in some regard, the veil didn't fully apply to John and so he was able to comprehend what was happening at the time of this ordination. Luke 1:41 tells us that John leaped for joy in Elizabeth's womb at the approach of the pregnant Mary. This jibes with the "filled with the Holy Ghost from the womb" language that OneEternalSonata already cited.

I'm not sure I would subscribe to a "priesthood-inherent-to-lineage" theory (except perhaps in the case of Jesus Himself). Aaron was a Levite, but apparently still had to be consecrated by Moses.

Edited January 20, 2010 by Just_A_Guy

[volgadon]

Shazz, the answer is we don't know.

[El_Super_Fantastico]

His Papa. He was High Priest. He baptize him.

[john doe]

I have a question that perhaps some of our old-timey bible scholars will know. How common was baptism at the time of Jesus? Were there certain Jews people who were called to baptize those who felt the need for it? Or is the first time someone heard of baptism when it was told of in the New Testament? I could be wrong, but I'm not sure I've read of baptism in the Old Testament.

[pam]

Interesting question. I just went to lds.org and looked up baptism and then asked it to filter for scriptural references. There is not an option for the Old Testament under the category of baptism.

[volgadon]

The practice of ritual bathings was common and popular.

[HiJolly]

I have a question that perhaps some of our old-timey bible scholars will know. How common was baptism at the time of Jesus? Were there certain Jews people who were called to baptize those who felt the need for it? Or is the first time someone heard of baptism when it was told of in the New Testament? I could be wrong, but I'm not sure I've read of baptism in the Old Testament.

Common. It was understood and performed regularly, but under a different name, and probably under a different authority, sort of (all true authority comes from God, of course). Otherwise, John the Baptist would've had a lot of very upset Pharisees and maybe even Saducees on his back.

The purification rituals performed in mikva'ot are equivalent to what we do as baptism, with some differences, which a knowledgeable Rabbi (or?) would be sure to point out. But the similarities are striking. A convert to Judaism is immersed in a Mikva whilst a purification prayer is pronounced. Kosher kitchen implements become 'kosher' via immersion in a Mikva, with attendant purification prayer. They are used to remove varied 'unclean' states from the faithful Jewish people (menstruation, touching the dead, etc.)

Mikva'ot are continually discovered in archaology digs throughout the middle east, from thousands of years ago.

HiJolly

[HiJolly]

Another cool thing. A working Mikva is not usable (is not a "Mikva") unless it has actively flowing water moving through it. Thus, the Jordan River served quite nicely. And it ties into the "living waters" theme of the Savior's ministry. Beautiful symbolism!

HiJolly

[volgadon]

The biggest current differences are that you baptise yourself, though a witness needs to be present, and that you do so in the nude. It isn't clear that this was the case around the time of John the Baptist.