What is the origin of baptism?

Baptism as we find it in Christianity is not an entirely new thing, but has its roots in the previous dispensation. There were Jewish baptisms more than one, which had an important place under the law; and the consideration of these will naturally prepare us for the better understanding of the New Testament form. It is well known that "there is an universal agreement among later Jewish writers that all the Israelites were brought into covenant with God by circumcision, baptism, and sacrifice, and that the same ceremonies were necessary in admitting proselytes" (Smith's Dictionary). But of this, Scripture says nothing, and we can build only on what is found in it. Apart from this altogether there were legal baptisms, although we must go to the New Testament for the word. This is applied in Mark 7:4, 8 and Luke 11:38 to mere ceremonial and traditional "washings," as to which we have only to note that they were clearly symbols of purification with a supposed sacramental efficacy. Similarly, it is when a dispute had arisen about purifying that John's disciples come and tell him that Jesus was baptizing. (John 3:26.)

It is only in Hebrews beside, and in two passages that we have reference to Jewish baptisms. As clearest we may take the latter first, which the Revised Version gives as follows: "According to which are offered both gifts and sacrifices that cannot, as touching the conscience, make the worshiper perfect, being only (with meats and drinks and divers washings) carnal ordinances, imposed until a time of reformation." (Heb. 9:10.) But this is not, as to the parenthesis thus introduced, an improvement on the common version. The word (epi) translated "with" has indeed very commonly the meaning of "with, in addition to," but it also means "dependent on," and this removes the parenthesis and brings what is contained in it into the main argument where it surely belongs. For why are they carnal ordinances, these gifts and sacrifices? Plainly, because they depend upon "meats and drinks and divers baptisms" — the real word. How could offerings consisting of such things set at rest the conscience?

It has often been said that the first mention of any subject in Scripture generally carries with it some special intimation as to its meaning. Let us then turn to Luke 3, where we get the first mention of Baptism historically, though not, of course, as to the order of the books.

It may be well, perhaps, to say a word as to the origin and history of Baptism. These are involved in a good deal of obscurity. The word is not once used in the O.T. But "religious meanings" were early attached to washings with water, both by heathens and Jews; they were among the ordinances of the Jewish law; and it is not necessary to go beyond that law to find the origin of the custom of washing or baptizing proselytes upon their admission into the Jewish system.

Its first mention in the Scriptures, as you are aware, is in connection with John the Baptist; and the very way it is mentioned, without any introduction or explanation, seems conclusive that the rite in some form or other was already recognised and understood.

I think you will find, in taking up the teaching of Scripture upon the subject of baptism, that it nearly always, if not entirely, signifies introduction into a place. "They were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea" (1 Cor. 10:2); that is, they were brought out fully into relationship with Moses as their leader, and the cloud and sea marked this connection. It was in contrast with their previous servitude to Pharaoh. So with all other baptisms. John's was not, as many may think, Christian baptism at all, but the badge of discipleship for those who heard and bowed to his message. They owned their sin and their desert of death, and in token of it were buried by baptism. Thus they were marked as John's disciples (John 4:1). They were not Christians, for they knew not Christ, but their baptism with water set forth discipleship to John, as penitents who bowed to the sentence of death. Acts 19:1-6 shows this was not Christian baptism, for it was repeated, upon the confession of faith in Christ.

Christian baptism would not be practised till our Lord had completed the work of atonement on the cross and had ascended triumphant to the right hand of God. So we read,

Again, what could Nicodemus have known about christian baptism? It was not then instituted; and the disciples' baptism was only a sort of modification of St. John's rite, i.e., the confession of a living Messiah, coming or come on earth. But proper christian baptism is founded upon the death and resurrection of our Lord. "Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized unto Jesus Christ, were baptized unto his death?" Christian baptism is the confession of the death and resurrection of Christ, and was instituted by our Lord when He rose from the dead. Then, and not before, He told them to go forth, baptizing all nations, or Gentiles, in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. He laid down the grand, full, christian revelation of the Godhead, into the confession of which the believer is brought by his baptism.

In Matthew 28:19 we have the risen Lord conferring authority upon his disciples to baptize. He authorizes them to baptize “to (eis) the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.” This is the only place where the authorization is mentioned. The authority for Christian baptism is found here, and here alone. The risen Lord in issuing a commission to the eleven to go and disciple all the nations, authorizes them to formally identify the disciples of Christ with the confession of “the name of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Ghost.” It is thus plain that baptism is a token, or mark, or badge, of discipleship to Christ. The badge of discipleship is put on by the baptism. The baptism signifies that the one baptized is connected with the profession of “the name of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Ghost.” Hence the formula “to,” (or “unto”) the name, and so forth.

It is hardly necessary to furnish detailed disproof of the crude, ill-considered notion (originated by the fathers), that baptism is in question. In truth, Christian baptism did not yet exist, but only such as the disciples used, like John the Baptist; it was not instituted of Christ till after His resurrection, as it sets forth His death. Had it been meant, it was no wonder that Nicodemus did not know how these things could be. But the Lord reproaches him, the master of Israel, with not knowing these things: that is, as a teacher, with Israel for his scholar, he ought to have known them objectively, at least, if not consciously. Isaiah 44:3, Isaiah 59:21, Ezekiel 36:25-27 ought to have made the Lord's meaning plain to an intelligent Jew. (Verse 10)

Ans.—Nothing can really wash away sins—for eternity and before God—but the precious blood of Christ. But baptism is a figure of salvation through the death of Christ, and therefore the language of the verse can be used. Where there was real faith there was real forgiveness, otherwise there was the mere outward discipleship of which baptism was the badge. Christian baptism was not instituted until after Christ had risen from the dead, when it became the official mode of entrance into the Kingdom. (See Acts 2:41). Peter was the first one to use it together with the key of knowledge to the Jews, and in Acts 10 he uses it to the Gentiles. Now one reason why we find in the Acts of the Apostles that every believer was called upon to be baptized was, because no one had hitherto been baptized in (or to) the Name of the Trinity, or in (or to) the Name of Jesus; those who had been baptized prior to that had simply been baptized unto John's baptism of repentance, but in Ephesus they had not heard whether the Holy Ghost that had been promised (see Matt.3) “had yet come” (Acts 19:2, Revised Ver.).

JEWISH. In Heb. 6:2 (βαπτισμός) the Hebrew believers were exhorted to leave 'the doctrine of baptisms;' and in Heb. 9:10 we read of 'divers baptisms or washings,' but which is followed by the words "imposed until the time of reformation," which 'time' is referred to as 'Christ being come.' This shows that the baptisms referred to were some part of the Jewish ritual, in which there were many washings and bathings; but none of these washings signified fully the baptism of the N.T., which as an initiatory ordinance places the baptised in a new position: the Red Sea (1 Cor. 10:2) was a figure of this. It was the Jewish washings that the Hebrew believers were exhorted to leave, or not to be laying again as a foundation.

We find at the beginning here Jesus with his disciples in the country of Judea, and baptizing, — although we are presently assured that personally the Lord did not baptize, but His disciples only (John 4:2). We have nowhere else an account of such baptizing, which we naturally conclude to have been of a similar character to that of John, which is immediately mentioned. It is a confirming witness of the truth that John was proclaiming, as we may gather also from Mark 1:15. Baptism is in the New Testament always to death; Christian baptism to Christ's death (Rom. 6:3); and to take one's place in death is a profession of repentance. Death is the sentence from God under which man has come through sin, and thus those baptized by John confessed in it the sins which had brought them there (Matt. 3:6). In such a position they awaited the forgiveness which He who was coming after John would bestow. Now He had come, and His own proper ministry began, as is clear, beyond John's baptism. Yet He could through His disciples confirm the truth of this, while taking care to keep His own place apart.