Page 198 - New English Book L

197

(e) According to the testimony of St. Mark (i. 1-8), the
baptism of John had the character of the “remission of sins.”
It is stated that “all the country of Judah and the inhabitants
of Jerusalem went out to him and were all baptized by
him in the River Jordan while confessing their sins.” This
is tantamount to saying that millions of the penitent Jews
confessed their sins were baptized by the Prophet, and then
their sins were obliterated by the waters of baptism. It is
generally admitted that St. Mark’s Gospel is the oldest of
the Four Gospels. Not all the Ancient Greek manuscripts
contain the last twelve verses added to chapter xvi of this
Gospel (verses 9-20). Even in these supplementary verses,
the formula “in the name of the Father, and of the Son and
of the Holy Ghost” is not inscribed. Jesus (pbuh) simply says
“Go and preach my Gospel unto the whole world; he who
believes and is baptized shall live, and he who does not
believe shall be damned”.

It is evident that the baptism of Jesus (pbuh) was the
same as that of John’s and a continuation of it. If the
baptism of John was a sufficient means of the remission
of sins, then the assertion that the “Lamb of God carries
away the sins of the world” john i. is exploded. If the
waters of the Jordan were efficacious enough to cleanse
the leprosy of Naaman through the prayer of the Prophet
Elisha (2 Kings v.), and to remit the sins of the myriads
through that of the Prophet John, the shedding of
the blood of a god would be superfluous and, indeed,
incompatible with the divine justice.

There is no doubt that until the appearance of
the Apostle Paul on the scene, the followers of Jesus
Christ (pbuh) practised the baptismal ritual of John
Baptist (pbuh) . It is significant to note that Paul was a
“Pharisee” belonging to a famous Jewish sect -like
that of the Saducess- whom John and Jesus (pbtuhem)
denounced as “the sons of the vipers.” It is also to