Written: 6/13/2022

Updated: 10/24/2022

Baptism is not a Jewish concept. Some confuse it with the mikvah -a ritual bath used for ritual purity. They are polar opposites in concept of the mikvah versus baptism.

Josephus, a Jewish priest who lived 2000 years ago and who wrote extensively during his time in Rome, supposedly wrote Antiquities of the Jews Book 18, Chapter 5, 2. I will quote it next, but I say “supposedly” because it may be a forgery. The oldest manuscripts of Josephus’ works date to the 10th century, but they don’t contain Chapter 18. The earliest manuscript with chapter 18 (this is known as Codex Ambrosianae) is some 900+ years after Josephus’ death.

M2 is the earliest complete manuscript of chapters 1 through 20 and it dates to around the 15th century, or nearly 1,300 years after his death.

With all of those caveats it is interesting to read this passage because in it he speaks of John the Baptist and how he performed baptisms. Note that he or whoever forged it speaks of it as closer to the mikvah use than Christian baptism.

Josephus explains that John was baptising only those whose souls were considered to be already thoroughly purified by righteousness. Far from remissing their sins, he was in fact providing the people who came to him a place to ritually purify their bodies. Being ritually impure is not in itself a sin for an average Israelite, but an Israelite in a state of ritual impurity is susceptible to transgressing various mitzvot. Thus, providing a means for righteous people to enter into a state of ritual purity prevents the possibility of those people transgressing those mitzvot.

Here is the quote:

“2. Now some of the Jews thought that the destruction of Herod’s army came from G-d, and that very justly, as a punishment of what he did against John, that was called the Baptist: for Herod slew him, who was a good man, and commanded the Jews to exercise virtue, both as to righteousness towards one another, and piety towards G-d, and so to come to baptism; for that the washing [with water] would be acceptable to him, if they made use of it, not in order to the putting away or the remission of some sins only, but for the purification of the body; supposing still that the soul was thoroughly purified beforehand by righteousness. Now when many others came in crowds about him, for they were very greatly moved or pleased by hearing his words, Herod, who feared lest the great influence John had over the people might put it into his power and inclination to raise a rebellion, for they seemed ready to do any thing he should advise, thought it best, by putting him to death, to prevent any mischief he might cause, and not bring himself into difficulties, by sparing a man who might make him repent of it when it would be too late. Accordingly he was sent a prisoner, out of Herod’s suspicious temper, to Macherus, the castle I before mentioned, and was there put to death. Now the Jews had an opinion that the destruction of this army was sent as a punishment upon Herod, and a mark of G-d’s displeasure to him.”

From Josephus and Modern Scholarship, 1937-1980 by Louis H. Feldman he documents the various Josephus’ scholars positions. On page 437:

“Legasse (1825) concludes that Christian baptism could not have been derived from its Jewish analogy (the mikvah S)., since there is remarkable silence about this practice in the (Greek) Testament, Philo and Josephus. We may, however, comment that the fact that Josephus (Ant. 18 117) uses the term baptism in connection with John the Baptist without explaining the term and the fact that he contrasts the purpose of baptism according to others (to gain pardon for sins) and according to John (as a consecration of the body, implying that the soul had already been cleansed by right behavior) shows that the institution of baptism was well established in Judaism before the time of John.”

Feldman continues on the next page: From the same book, page 677:

“Scobie. Pp. 110 – 111, believes that Josephus’ statement that John’s baptism was for purification of the body is not based on first hand evidence and may have been due to Josephus’ assumption that John’s baptism was identical with Bannus’. We may, however, reply that this is unlikely, inasmuch as Josephus takes the trouble to say specifically that John’s baptism was intended as a consecration of the body and inasmuch as Josephus uses special words. . .for John’s baptism. Scovie suggests that Josephus’ statement that John’s baptism was not for the remission of sins is an attempt to dissociate him from the new sect of Christians.”

Bannus’ (an Essene) take on baptism is recorded by Josephus in (Life 2. 11). Josephus mentions that the Essenes washed before meals, and that senior Essenes washed if the touched a junior Essene (War 2.8.5; 129, 149, 150).

https://www.aish.com/atr/Mikveh_-_Why.html

Jews don’t call it “baptism.”

It is more accurate to say that the Christian ceremony called baptism is based on, and an outgrowth of, the use of a mikveh (Jewish ritual bath) as part of the process for conversion of a proselyte to become a member of the Jewish people, male or female. Males, in addition, also underwent a ritual circumcision (even if they were already medically circumcised, this does not fulfill the intent element of the ritual, as a present physical sign of their commitment to join the Jewish nation.

The thing is, the mikveh is not only used during proselyte conversions, but in many other circumstances as well — by both men and women. So it is not an exact parallel to baptism. The Christian dogma is based on one relatively small and infrequent use of the mikveh, which has other, much more common ritual uses.

And, it’s not only before the common era that these practices occurred. The mikveh is still an important part of observant (i.e. Orthodox) Jewish practice today, in all the ways it was used two thousand years ago.

Talmudic sages tell us that the first and most important communal structure a nascent Jewish community should contribute to providing for the community, is a mikveh — it is much more important than building a synagogue, which is simply a meeting place for prayer. Jews can pray anywhere in private, and anywhere in public that they are allowed to meet publicly.

Torah requires immersion in the mikveh, by both bride and groom, before a wedding, as a symbol and act of purification. Mikveh is also required after a woman has completed a menstrual period plus seven days, and for a man after any seminal emission (voluntary or involuntary) before entering sacred spaces again. Immersion in a mikveh may also be required after touching carrion, touching a dead body, or touching certain other taboo objects. Some eating utensils and containers can also be kashered (rendered fit for use by Jews, after being used with non-kosher foods) by immersion in a mikveh. The list goes on.

So no, mikveh is not exactly the same as baptism. And the doctrine of baptism adds certain elements to the ritual that are alien to any Judaic practice. But the institutions (ideas) of baptism and the mikveh do share certain elements, including the symbolism of purification through water, the symbolism of rebirth, and the symbolic idea of gaining a new (or renewed) soul through participation in the ritual immersion.