Jesus Never Baptized Anyone?

[Saints Alive]

"1 When therefore the Lord knew how the Pharisees had heard that Jesus made and baptized more disciples than John,

2 (Though Jesus himself baptized not, but his disciples,) (New Testament, John, Chapter 4)"

Is it true that Jesus never baptized anyone?

If so does that have any significance?

[thesometimesaint]

The Scriptures are confusing on the issue

Did Jesus baptize anyone?

Yes.

"After these things came Jesus and his disciples into the land of Judaea; and there he tarried with them, and baptized." John 3:22

No.

"Though Jesus himself baptized not, but his disciples." John 4:2

Explanation:

There are two different explanations to arrive at in the case of Jesus’ baptisms. Either He baptized believers personally, in the beginning, and then delegated the responsibility to His disciples later; or, His disciples had done all of the baptizing “in His name”.

For the former possibility, notice that John 4:2 says “baptized not”, not “never did baptize”, so the matter is uncertain based on this verse.

If He did indeed never baptize anyone personally, then John 4:1 as well will give us more comprehension of that position:

“When therefore the Lord knew how the Pharisees had heard that Jesus made and baptized more disciples than John, (Though Jesus himself baptized not, but his disciples)” John 4:1-2

In this passage, first it says He baptized, then it says that He Himself didn’t. These statements together infer that to say “Jesus baptized” meant “the disciples of Jesus baptized”. It is somewhat like saying “The U.S. won the war” even though it was specifically won by the individual soldiers operating as part of the military unit.

Taking John 3 in its entirety into consideration, it is highly probable that Jesus Himself at least baptized some people in the beginning of His ministry.

I don't see as it makes any difference whom we are baptized by as long as they have the authority to do so.

Edited August 24, 2012 by thesometimesaint

[Jude2]

I’ve wondered about that too, I do think what is more important is that he himself was baptized!

The incident actually begins in chapter 3 where there seems to be some Pharisees trying to cause a rift between Jesus and John by counting how many convert baptisms each was getting. John didn’t fall for it and replied “…this my joy therefore is fulfilled. He must increase, but I must decrease.”

Wouldn’t it be nice if all of us could feel that way about each others accomplishments.

John the Baptist said

“I indeed have baptized you with water: abut he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost.” Mark 1

So yes there maybe some significance but I don‘t know what it is.

There is an event which only John records in John 20 where the resurrected Lord appears to them, he writes “he breathed on them, and saith unto them, Receive ye the Holy Ghost”

[theplains]

If so does that have any significance?

If I remember correctly, Jesus did not baptize anyone in the Book of Mormon. Nephi went into the water (apparently

by himself) and baptized himself, came out of the water and then baptized the others (3 Nephi 19:10-14). This

resulted in spectacular observations as mentioned therein (baptism with fire / Holy Ghost, encircled by something

as if it were fire, and visited by angels). Then it is recorded that Jesus came and stood in their midst (v.15).

Regards,

Jim

[Grundelwalken]

JST John 4:2 -- Now the Lord knew this, though he himself baptized not so many as his disciples, for he suffered them for an example, preferring one another. MW

[oremites]

If I remember correctly, Jesus did not baptize anyone in the Book of Mormon.

But keep in mind that He was resurrected at that point and no longer part of the "mortal" world. Does that make a difference?

[theplains]

JST John 4:2 -- Now the Lord knew this, though he himself baptized not so many as his disciples, for he suffered them for an example, preferring one another. MW

Thanks.

I saw it on http://www.lds.org/s...john/4?lang=eng

John 4:1–4

1 When therefore the Pharisees had heard that Jesus made and baptized more disciples than John,

2 They sought more diligently some means that they might put him to death; for many received John as a prophet, but they believed not on Jesus.

3 Now the Lord knew this, though he himself baptized not so many as his disciples;

4 For he suffered them for an example, preferring one another.

KJV has the following:

1 When therefore the Lord knew how the Pharisees had heard that Jesus made and baptized more disciples than John,

2 (Though Jesus himself baptized not, but his disciples,)

3 He left Judaea, and departed again into Galilee.

4 And he must needs go through Samaria.

I wonder if John's account in the KJV is a record of the hearsay of the Pharisees. I found the complete JST version at

http://www.centerpla.../iv/default.htm

On the other hand, verse 2 in the JST is wrong. The Pharisees did not receive John as a prophet. And the number of

disciples that Jesus accumulated was not the "most diligent" factor leading the Pharisees to want to kill Jesus.

Thanks,

Jim

[drake01605]

The apparent confusion can be resolved by applying the law of agency. The ancient Latin legal term was qui facit per alium, facit per se, i.e. the one who acts through another, acts himself. This principle is employed many times in the Scriptures. A few examples (All quotes KJV):

Gen. 45:8 "So now it was not you that sent me hither, but God". Joseph was not denying the historical facts.

John 19:1 "Then Pilate therefore took Jesus, and scourged him." John knew that Pilate did not personally administer the scourging.

Perhaps one of the clearest examples is found by comparing the accounts of Jesus healing the centurion's servant in Matt. 8:5-13 and Luke 7:1-10. You really should check out both passages for yourself, but notice in particular these two statements:

Matt. 8:8-9 "The centurion answered and said, Lord, I am not worthy that thou shouldest come under my roof: but speak the word only, and my servant shall be healed. 9 For I am a man under authority, having soldiers under me: and I say to this man, Go, and he goeth; and to another, Come, and he cometh; and to my servant, Do this, and he doeth it."

Luke 7:6-8 "...the centurion sent friends to him, saying unto him, Lord, trouble not thyself: for I am not worthy that thou shouldest enter under my roof:7 Wherefore neither thought I myself worthy to come unto thee: but say in a word, and my servant shall be healed.8 For I also am a man set under authority, having under me soldiers, and I say unto one, Go, and he goeth; and to another, Come, and he cometh; and to my servant, Do this, and he doeth it."

Matthew was certainly aware of the details that Luke shares with us. He simply employs a common figure of speech when he assigns to the centurion the actions of his agents. I believe that this is exactly what is going on in John 4:1-2. Since these baptisms were being carried out by Jesus' disciples (disciples do as their Master instructs), it is perfectly legitimate for John to credit these baptisms to Jesus.

One common error is that the word "never" is often read into John 4:2, as in "Jesus never baptized anyone". An examination of the passage will show that these baptisms were being performed beginning at the time that Jesus and His disciples came into Judea (John 3:22) and ending with them leaving Judea (John 4:3) So, Jesus could have personally administered the rite at some time before or after this without contradicting John 4:2.

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

"1 When therefore the Lord knew how the Pharisees had heard that Jesus made and baptized more disciples than John,

2 (Though Jesus himself baptized not, but his disciples,) (New Testament, John, Chapter 4)"

Is it true that Jesus never baptized anyone?

If so does that have any significance?

Just because it is not listed or written...does not mean he didn't.