The East India Company: The Original Corporate Raiders

[allodial]

Coronation.

If one avoids confusing extra-Hebraic practices of "baptism" with the OT Hebraic immersion/mikveh, it would be clear that the Holy Spirit's settling upon him would be the only thing at Mark 11 that has to do with coronation: anointing. The entire OT temple layout figured the process of salvation. Mikveh was required for the royal priesthood--full body immersion and neither sprinkling of blood, water, wine nor oil. To project foreign or copy-cat practices onto the practices of Hebrews would just serve to confuse. The Babylonians see reality through Babylonian eyes. The Hebrews were not Babylonians.


Note: the laver comes before entry into the congregation. The light of the oil-powered lampstands would hardly be directly visible from without! To see it one had to enter into the congregation, no?

That lots of people used the word "baptism" in connection with some "coronation" ceremony after 70AD as copycats or 'holy ritual designers' (whether to legitimize one claim or another to authority or to put on a really impressive show) doesn't make retroactive projection fit the OT plan or purpose.

A person was required to be ritually pure in order to enter the Temple. In this context, "purity" and "impurity" are imperfect translations of the Hebrew "tahara" and "tumah", respectively, in that the negative connotation of the word impurity is not intended; rather being "impure" is indicative of being in a state in which certain things are prohibited until one has become "pure" again by immersion in a mikveh. {Wiki author evidences lack of comprehension of what it means to be 'ritually unclean' due to failure to specifically utilize that term.}

Consider entry into the Temple becoming part of the House of God or the Assembly of the Anointed (Christ)--mikveh was about purification not coronation. There is nothing in the scriptures OT or NT to suggest otherwise. To get the general idea, consider the notion that subsequent to purification, the one now clean could access the presence of God. Mikveh itself is not coronation/anointing. Anointing is very specific.

For those who worshiped 'sea gods' or the saw the sea (Mari/mer/mar/mermaids/mercantilism/Mercury) as the 'holy sea' (Dagon, Oannes), sure application of water might be seen as a kind of coronation. But most certainly that was neither the Hebrew nor Melchizedek perspective. In the Hebrew realm, anointing was and is done with oil not water.



In the Temple, light was provided by oil-powered candles rather than by wicked candles. Note 'wicked' candles provide their own light and burn of themselves.

...What are these two olive trees upon the right side of the candlestick and upon the left side thereof? And I answered again, and said unto him, What be these two olive branches which through the two golden pipes empty the golden oil out of themselves? And he answered me and said, Knowest thou not what these be? And I said, No, my lord. Then said he, These are the two anointed ones, that stand by the Lord of the whole earth. Zech. 4:11-14 (11 in part)

At Zechariah 4:14, "anointed ones" is literally "sons of oil" (b'nai ytzar).

One perspective: oil floats on water, water can extinguish fire and drown people. Another: The scriptural Israel wasn't about formation of secular state. Edom/Esau being carnally minded would miss this point. It was the secularization that prompted judgement even in Hezekiah's time.

30 AD to 70AD was a long grace period (two 20-year periods). The king's missionaries were in the field to maximize the extent of salvation. Who sends missionaries out for 5 seconds? There had to be adequate time to give those of the land to get clued up. Hedges of protection around Jerusalem were removed starting around 66AD and the Idumeans with other nations were standing at the gates. Judgment came ~66AD to 70AD. It has been suggested that Rome-Babylon along with the Idumeans (who were enemies of Israel and Judah) were used as instruments of such judgment. The Worthless Shepherd hardly fits Yeshua/Jesus: the war was waged on the spiritual level first and foremost, the carnally minded would miss the point entirely: the battle was won on the spiritual level. The Romans even blamed the saints for the failure of their oracles and the like subsequent to the crucifixion--even their records evidence something remarkable happened in the spiritual and psychic realms in those days.

P.S. Contrary to infant baptism proponents, it is said according to the Essenes that the age of 30 years had to be attained before any king could be anointed or perhaps even admitted to the congregation. 30 as the 'spiritual age of accountability'.

Related:
The Third Temple: Spiritual or Physical?