Reply to comment

Rituals fill life in any culture, some more than others. A ritual, even though it brings with it the possibility of misunderstanding, is not a bad thing. Circumcision, despite how we have come to see it, became embedded in the very culture of Israel as the testimony to God's covenant with them. As I understand it, no Israelite would have argued with another as to whether to circumcise his son, for there was no question in their minds. That's just what they did. Paul himself baptized a few people, and he also had Timothy circumcised.

Paul came also to Derbe and to Lystra. And a disciple was there, named Timothy, the son of a Jewish woman who was a believer, but his father was a Greek, and he was well spoken of by the brethren who were in Lystra and Iconium. Paul wanted this man to go with him; and he took him and circumcised him because of the Jews who were in those parts, for they all knew that his father was a Greek. Acts 16:1-3 (NASB)

While many assume this conflicts with his claim that he did not preach circumcision, the whole matter was so rooted in the Jewish culture that it only served in his ministry to the people of his Jewish heritage. It wouldn't have come across as any kind of requirement to the Gentiles, as it simply did not apply to them. On top of that, Paul made his gospel known as having nothing to do with a fleshly circumcision.

You mentioned Philip and the Ethiopian. Why do you assume that he knew nothing about baptism when it seems that he was the one who initiated the subject by his request? Remember, the Ethiopian was returning from worshiping in Jerusalem, and he was reading from the book of Isaiah at the time. He was probably a proselyte to the Jewish religion. I think he was quite familiar with John the baptizer, as well as the baptism of those Jews who followed Christ.

Actually, the man God used to seek out Saul was Ananias:

Now there was a disciple at Damascus named Ananias; and the Lord said to him in a vision, “Ananias.” And he said, “Here I am, Lord.” And the Lord said to him, “Get up and go to the street called Straight, and inquire at the house of Judas for a man from Tarsus named Saul, for he is praying, and he has seen in a vision a man named Ananias come in and lay his hands on him, so that he might regain his sight.” But Ananias answered, “Lord, I have heard from many about this man, how much harm he did to Your saints at Jerusalem; and here he has authority from the chief priests to bind all who call on Your name.” But the Lord said to him, “Go, for he is a chosen instrument of Mine, to bear My name before the Gentiles and kings and the sons of Israel; for I will show him how much he must suffer for My name’s sake.” So Ananias departed and entered the house, and after laying his hands on him said, “Brother Saul, the Lord Jesus, who appeared to you on the road by which you were coming, has sent me so that you may regain your sight and be filled with the Holy Spirit.” And immediately there fell from his eyes something like scales, and he regained his sight, and he got up and was baptized; and he took food and was strengthened. Now for several days he was with the disciples who were at Damascus, Acts 9:10-19 (NASB)

As I read it, there is a simple statement made that Saul got up and was baptized after he received his sight. Once again, I see the ritual regarded as a statement, held in great anticipation by those who came to faith in Christ. It seems they couldn't wait to make it known to the community that the blindness had been broken down.

Jim