The one-sided propaganda was all too clear in this latest Roundtable discussion on baptism among a former Lutheran, former Southern Baptist, former non-denominational evangelical and the host, Marcus, a former Presbyterian.

Maybe I don't know as much as I think, but the presentation of basic beliefs about baptism across those denominational boundaries was wanting and forced into the myth of trajectory: the further from Rome, the more watered-down (pardon the pun) the baptismal doctrine. "Distance from Rome" being measured chronologically.

Let's be fair: the Reformers in question got their teachings from the Bible, nothing more and nothing less.

But what follows below is simply dishonest ...

At about 39:12 into the one-hour program, the Southern Baptist-turned-Catholic priest is discussing a Scripture that caused him to question a Baptist tradition about baptism.

Of course, I had always been told that, well, Jesus never baptized.

I had been told that my whole life: Jesus never baptized.

But if you look at John, chapter 3, Jesus goes into this long discourse with Nicodemus on baptism: Amen, amen, I say to you, no one can enter the kingdom of God without being born of water and Spirit.¹

And then if you skip over to chapter 3, verse 22, the Bible reads, “After this, Jesus and his disciples went into the region of Judea, where he - Jesus - spent some time with them baptizing."²

Immediately following this discourse in John chapter 3, Jesus goes out and immediately starts to baptize. Because I had always been told, well, that in John chapter 3, Jesus is not talking about baptism. Jesus is talking about what we would have called the “new birth.”

Yes, John, chapter 3 is speaking of water baptism, especially in the context of the surrounding narrative, the water-turned-wine at Cana and the woman at the well. But, Good Father, keep reading in your Scriptures. Break the Baptist habit of letting chapters and verses define your study. See the "editorial refinement"³ of John 4:2 - (although Jesus himself was not baptizing, just his disciples)

The apparent contradiction can be reconciled to say that Jesus authorized and oversaw the disciples' baptism actions without himself taking part. We may even say this arrangement continues until the present day. Whether or not Jesus (or Paul) baptized is a red herring; it's clear his followers do, at Christ's command (Matt. 28:19).

But nobody corrects anybody on The Journey Home. It's bad form.

---

¹ John 3:5 from the New American Bible!

² See NAB footnote: Perhaps John the Baptist's further testimony was transposed here to give meaning to "water" in John 3:5. Jesus is depicted as baptizing (John 3:22); contrast John 4:2.

³ Footnote on John 4:2: "An editorial refinement of John 3:22, perhaps directed against followers of John the Baptist who claimed that Jesus imitated him."