Page 201 - Demo

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 theProphet Elisha (2 Kings v.), and to remit the sins of the myriads through that of the Prophet John, the shedding ofthe 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