Baptism... It's What Pagans Did

King David

Established
Joined
Mar 13, 2017
Messages
338
Shalom :)

If you do a google search on the origins of baptism, the Christian websites populate the top searches talking about John and Jesus... But where did they get baptism from?

Have any of the Christians ever thought "Why baptism?" I mean why all of a sudden are Christians supposed to baptize each other? Why did Jesus say to John to "let us fulfill all righteousness" Mat 3:15

What was he referring to? Is it ever mentioned in the "Old Testament?"

One Christian site says, "the origins of baptism might be found in the book of Leviticus where the Levite priests were commanded to perform a symbolic cleansing in water before and after performing their priestly duties. Leviticus 16:4 tells us, “He is to put on the sacred linen tunic, with linen undergarments next to his body; he is to tie the linen sash around him and put on the linen turban. These are sacred garments; so he must bathe himself with water before he puts them on.”

But this is Clearly different than immersing one's entire body under water and receiving a baptism. To the Church of Christ, Mark 16:16 says you have to be baptized to be saved. I witnessed in the Church of Christ that they won't let you sleep with your boyfriend or girlfriend (refusing Communion of course for being impure) unless you've been baptized. You won't ever get an invite to sing in the magnificent Christmas caroling production either. Nor will you be allowed to refer to Darth Vader as having the "good force" in any of your sermons.

True story...

Another Christian site reveals that the practice of baptism was carried out by pre-christian religions.

"Pre-Christian Religions
The practice of baptism in pagan religions seems to have been based on a belief in the purifying properties of water. In ancient Babylon, according to the Tablets of Maklu, water was important as a spiritual cleansing agent in the cult of Enke, lord of Eridu. In Egypt, the Book of Going Forth by Day contains a treatise on the baptism of newborn children, which is performed to purify them of blemishes acquired in the womb. Water, especially the Nile's cold water, which was believed to have regenerative powers, is used to baptize the dead in a ritual based on the Osiris myth. Egyptian cults also developed the idea of regeneration through water. The bath preceding initiation into the cult of Isis seems to have been more than a simple ritual purification; it was probably intended to represent symbolically the initiate's death to the life of this world by recalling Osiris' drowning in the Nile.

In the cult of Cybele, a baptism of blood was practiced in the rite of the Taurobolium: where one was covered with the blood of a bull. At first this rite seems to have been to provide the initiate with greater physical vitality, but later it acquired more of a spiritual importance. A well-known inscription attests that he who has received baptism of blood has received a new birth in eternity. However, the fact that this baptism was repeated periodically shows that the idea of complete spiritual regeneration was not associated with it.

The property of immortality was also associated with baptism in the ancient Greek world. A bath in the sanctuary of Trophonion procured for the initiate a blessed immortality even while in this world. The mystery religions of that period often included ablution rites of either immersion or a washing of the body for the purposes of purification or initiation. Other concepts said to have been associated with these forms of cultic baptisms included the transformation of one's life, the removal of sins, symbolic representation, the attainment of greater physical vitality, a new beginning, spiritual regeneration. It is believed that all ancient religions recognized some form of spiritual cleansing, renewal or initiation that was accomplished through a washing or immersion in water."

Since there is no Old Testament Law or guidance regarding baptism, we must safely presume that baptism was a pagan practice, long before Jesus or John. This in and of itself is not surprising at this point is it? I mean Jesus mens "Hail Zeus," all the liturgy that is performed, including "Communion" is pagan, so why not baptism too right?

I found it strange after reading through the New Testament with "New" eyes that John is never recorded as healing anyone. He was supposedly the "greatest man" besides Jesus (Matthew 11:11), yet what were his accomplishments? He ate locust and honey (Mat 3:4) and lived in the desert. What else are we told? Not much, except that he was possibly offended at Jesus (Mat 11:6).

So why was he so great? I'll let you ponder that...

Back to baptism...

It is interesting that there is not only a water baptism that is looked fondly upon by Christians, but also a baptism of the Holy Spirit, which is referenced in Matthew 3:11:

"As for me, I baptize you with water for repentance, but He who is coming after me is mightier than I, and I am not fit to remove His sandals; He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire."

So Christians are taught that a baptism of fire awaits them after they are baptized...

Hmm... Where is any of this referenced in the Old Testament? Surely Yahwuah would have said something about a baptism of fire that is coming right? Surely He would have said that fire was going to descend on someone in the future right?

But you know what? He didn't....

So if the Father did not authorize baptism, then it appears that baptism is an abomination that anyone who calls themselves a Child of Elohim should refrain from. I mean if the facts are that baptism was a pagan practice before Jesus supposedly came and died, then why would Christians desire to embrace this act? Why can they not see that the practices that Jesus, John, and Paul endorsed are purely pagan in origin?

If you've ever been involved with Baptism of the Holy Spirit, it is even more ridiculous and abominable than a water baptism. I remember one of the leaders telling a young man to prepare himself to act wildly while I was there for support. He told him it could take hours of prayer and mediation. The reward of our efforts was simply to see the man frothing and flailing around like a mad man. I remember thinking that it was just silly.

We have to ask ourselves: "Is this even Godly? To act wildly and out of control? Yet millions of people claim to have had a Baptism of the Holy Spirit. I was recently told by a man how he got a "baptism in urine" by high powered freemasons when he was a child. So if the Freemasons are doing baptisms, is this something a Christian wants to be associated with? Does this not reveal further the pagan origins of baptism?

If you research baptism on your own you will find additional information of how many satanic cults even today speak of baptizing their initiates into knowledge and light. This seems to be at the core of baptism; a pagan ritual regarding an initiation of some kind into gnostic understanding and worldly wisdom.

It seems to Me that we have discovered yet another practice and another pagan ritual that Christians deem as holy, just like Communion and the glorification of cannibalism. It seems we have found another pagan practice that found its way into the hearts of those who say they know the Father, Yahuwah.

It seems that Many need to repent.

In fact it's time for Christians to research the roots of their Hebrew faith to find out what is compatible with the New Testament and what is not. Once they do this they are going to find out that Nothing is compatible. Not the god they worship, the church they go to, nor the Bible they read.

We have different Fathers friends, different Gods...

My Elohim is Yahuwah and your god (Christians) is Zeus, the father of the pagans and their filthy rituals. Here's a video from the deceiver Benny Hinn, one of the proponents of a "baptism in fire."

Enjoy...

 
Last edited:

JoChris

Superstar
Joined
Mar 15, 2017
Messages
6,168
Mark 16:16 basically says you have to be baptized to be saved
So you DO believe Jesus when it suits you? What a surprise....
Whole verse.
Mark 16:16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.
Is it ever mentioned in the "Old Testament?"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_baptism
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ritual_washing_in_Judaism#Full-body_immersion
I found it strange after reading through the New Testament with "New" eyes that John is never recorded as healing anyone. He was supposedly the "greatest man" besides Jesus (Matthew 11:11), yet what were his accomplishments?
Chapter and verse from BIBLE where the archangel Michael healed anyone please.
It seems to Me that we have discovered yet another practice and another pagan ritual that Christians deem as holy, just like Communion and the glorification of cannibalism.
You obviously can't tell the difference between Catholic doctrines of transubstantiaton and this passage:

Luke 22: 17 And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and said, Take this, and divide it among yourselves:
18 For I say unto you, I will not drink of the fruit of the vine, until the kingdom of God shall come.
19 And he took bread, and gave thanks, and brake it, and gave unto them, saying, This is my body which is given for you: this do in remembrance of me.
20 Likewise also the cup after supper, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood, which is shed for you.

The doctrine wasn't even formally made Catholic doctrine until 1215 AD.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_the_Catholic_Church#800.E2.80.931453

---
P.S. We agree on Benny Hinn's counterfeit Christianity.
 

King David

Established
Joined
Mar 13, 2017
Messages
338
So you DO believe Jesus when it suits you? What a surprise....
Whole verse.
Mark 16:16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_baptism
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ritual_washing_in_Judaism#Full-body_immersion

Chapter and verse from BIBLE where the archangel Michael healed anyone please.

You obviously can't tell the difference between Catholic doctrines of transubstantiaton and this passage:

Luke 22: 17 And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and said, Take this, and divide it among yourselves:
18 For I say unto you, I will not drink of the fruit of the vine, until the kingdom of God shall come.
19 And he took bread, and gave thanks, and brake it, and gave unto them, saying, This is my body which is given for you: this do in remembrance of me.
20 Likewise also the cup after supper, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood, which is shed for you.

The doctrine wasn't even formally made Catholic doctrine until 1215 AD.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_the_Catholic_Church#800.E2.80.931453

---
P.S. We agree on Benny Hinn's counterfeit Christianity.
JoChris, you need to slow down on the coffee or cut back on the sugar... You keep misunderstanding what it is I'm saying. I do not believe in Zeus (Jesus) whatsoever... Nor will a person be damned for not believing in Zeus.

Shalom :)
 

Thunderian

Superstar
Joined
Mar 13, 2017
Messages
7,515
Just as a point of fact, and just in case anyone didn't get the verse JoChris posted, you do not need to be baptized to be saved. The thief that was crucified with Christ was not baptized, yet Jesus promised him paradise. Baptism is a symbolic act of profession of faith in Jesus, and represents being buried with Christ, and emerging as a new person in Him.

My own baptism is one of the sweetest memories of my life. I was baptized in July in English Bay in Vancouver, Canada, as crowds of people strolled by on the seawall, wondering what these lunatics were doing. Some of my family was visiting from out of town, and my dad happened to know the pastor of my church from a course they had taken together, so the three of us went into the water together and they both dunked me. I never felt so clean. :)
 

King David

Established
Joined
Mar 13, 2017
Messages
338
Just as a point of fact, and just in case anyone didn't get the verse JoChris posted, you do not need to be baptized to be saved. The thief that was crucified with Christ was not baptized, yet Jesus promised him paradise. Baptism is a symbolic act of profession of faith in Jesus, and represents being buried with Christ, and emerging as a new person in Him.

My own baptism is one of the sweetest memories of my life. I was baptized in July in English Bay in Vancouver, Canada, as crowds of people strolled by on the seawall, wondering what these lunatics were doing. Some of my family was visiting from out of town, and my dad happened to know the pastor of my church from a course they had taken together, so the three of us went into the water together and they both dunked me. I never felt so clean. :)
You illustrate a Very Good point regarding interpretations. I agree with your interpretation of Mark 16:16 and have edited my post. I rushed through that one and had to make a few other changes too. Mark 16:16 seems to be clear. But you can't tell that to a Church of Christ member... And why? Because they have been purposefully planted by Satan, just like the other denominations who advocate some strange departure from logic.

The truth is that it doesn't matter what the Church of Christ believes as far as baptism, because the root of baptism is the problem, just like the root of Christianity is the problem. Baptisms as I point out were and still are a Pagan practice!

Why is Mark the only place that mentions baptism and belief in the same sentence, causing this potential for confusion? Why should we trust Mark who was simply a friend of Saul and not an eye witness of Anything Jesus supposedly did? Mark's testimony doesn't even match the others even though it is really just a copy of Matthew... Why?

Why would Yahuwah make all of this so difficult on His people?

Why does the Father say in Isaiah 1:26 and 2:3 that the Law and Judges will be reinstated "as at the first" if the Law was fulfilled by Jesus? Why will there be sacrifices in the rebuilt Temple by the Prince, the One who the eastern gate is opened for if Jesus was the final sacrifice?

Do you see how Satan gets people to argue over nonsense such as "baptism vs. no baptism?" The Real Issue when it comes to salvation has to due with the validation of Jesus and his phony sacrifice to begin with...
 

Thunderian

Superstar
Joined
Mar 13, 2017
Messages
7,515
Why should we trust Mark who was simply a friend of Saul and not an eye witness of Anything Jesus supposedly did?
So you admit that Mark actually wrote the gospel with his name on it? I thought no one knew who wrote the Gospels.

Like I said before, if you aren't going to be consistent with reality, at least be consistent with your own arguments.
 

King David

Established
Joined
Mar 13, 2017
Messages
338
So you admit that Mark actually wrote the gospel with his name on it? I thought no one knew who wrote the Gospels.
No I don't! You know you respond so quickly, because all you're trying to do is argue and banter. It is as I have said, the Gospells had one or two authors - Josephus and/or Saul.

You're not grasping the bigger picture: baptism is pagan and so is Jesus (Zeus).
 

JoChris

Superstar
Joined
Mar 15, 2017
Messages
6,168
JoChris, you need to slow down on the coffee or cut back on the sugar... You keep misunderstanding what it is I'm saying. I do not believe in Zeus (Jesus) whatsoever... Nor will a person be damned for not believing in Zeus.

Shalom :)
No way will I cut down on my coffee. Anyway I am in a totally different time zone.

Then stop using the New Testament as evidence - as if you believe it - to back up your bizarre theories.

It's as if you convinced you've created this loophole ...



you ain't fooling no-one else.
 

Thunderian

Superstar
Joined
Mar 13, 2017
Messages
7,515
You can't hide from it now, lol.

You said:

Why should we trust Mark who was simply a friend of Saul and not an eye witness of Anything Jesus supposedly did?

Mark who was simply a friend of Saul

simply a friend of Saul

friend of Saul
 

King David

Established
Joined
Mar 13, 2017
Messages
338
You can't hide from it now, lol.

You said:

Why should we trust Mark who was simply a friend of Saul and not an eye witness of Anything Jesus supposedly did?

Mark who was simply a friend of Saul

simply a friend of Saul

friend of Saul
Lol :D Whatever man. You are so split you are scary!
Listen to Me, I hide from Nothing. We do not know for sure who wrote the wicked Gospells yet, but what we know is that they are lies.
You can't hide from the fact that you do not understand Ezekiel 42:13 or 46:12. You can't hide the fact that you are a snake...
 

rainerann

Star
Joined
Mar 18, 2017
Messages
4,550
No I don't! You know you respond so quickly, because all you're trying to do is argue and banter. It is as I have said, the Gospells had one or two authors - Josephus and/or Saul.

You're not grasping the bigger picture: baptism is pagan and so is Jesus (Zeus).
What makes you think Josephus wrote the Gospels?
 

King David

Established
Joined
Mar 13, 2017
Messages
338
What makes you think Josephus wrote the Gospels?
It doesn't matter if it was Jospehus or not, who was a power player in the Roman church at the time of their release...
The goSpells all have the same voice, the same tone and are wickedly confusing with much contradiction. They have one author and that is the spirit of Satan...
 

Thunderian

Superstar
Joined
Mar 13, 2017
Messages
7,515
If you research the NT thoroughly, you will find that the Gospells were all originally anonymous. They were given names 100 years later and their author's are highly contested by even Christian "scholars."
Why should we trust Mark who was simply a friend of Saul and not an eye witness of Anything Jesus supposedly did?
Let me ask you another in a long list of questions you are "not hiding" from: Why don't the above posts match?
 

King David

Established
Joined
Mar 13, 2017
Messages
338
Let me ask you another in a long list of questions you are "not hiding" from: Why don't the above posts match?
Listen, I was simply trying to connect with the knowledge that you cling to in order to bridge the gap of your misunderstanding. According to their source: the Catholic Church in their Encyclopedia, they were initially released anonymously. However the information you are going off of is that Mark was an author. My point in either case is why should we trust "Mark," who wasn't even an eye witness according to Jochris. I don't buy that he was the author at all. Understand?
 

rainerann

Star
Joined
Mar 18, 2017
Messages
4,550
It doesn't matter if it was Jospehus or not, who was a power player in the Roman church at the time of their release...
The goSpells all have the same voice, the same tone and are wickedly confusing with much contradiction. They have one author and that is the spirit of Satan...
Website listing all the times Jesus quotes the Old Testament. https://jewsforjesus.org/publications/newsletter/newsletter-sep-2008/jesus-references-to-old-testament-scriptures/

Tell me again how the many, many times that Jesus quotes the Old Testament demonstrate that there is a contradiction between the Old and New Testament.

There is enough here to start all the "Nugget" threads you need to last you until your expiration date when you are are not revealed as the Messiah in the next two years. Tick, Tock...time is running out KD.
 

King David

Established
Joined
Mar 13, 2017
Messages
338
Website listing all the times Jesus quotes the Old Testament. https://jewsforjesus.org/publications/newsletter/newsletter-sep-2008/jesus-references-to-old-testament-scriptures/

Tell me again how the many, many times that Jesus quotes the Old Testament demonstrate that there is a contradiction between the Old and New Testament.

There is enough here to start all the "Nugget" threads you need to last you until your expiration date when you are are not revealed as the Messiah in the next two years. Tick, Tock...time is running out KD.
I'd consider answering some of your questions if I could understand them! There's plenty of time. Don't rush me woman.
 

rainerann

Star
Joined
Mar 18, 2017
Messages
4,550
So then you pulled the name Josephus out of a hat? Why would you suggest that the Jewish historian Josephus were responsible for the present state of the Gospel? I don't agree, I am just wondering.
 
Top