Baptism of the Lord: meaning

Matthew 3: ¹³ Then Jesus came from Galilee to John at the Jordan to be baptized by him. ¹⁴ John tried to prevent him, saying, “I need to be baptized by you, and yet you are coming to me?” ¹⁵ Jesus said to him in reply, “Allow it now, for thus it is fitting for us to fulfill all righteousness.” Then he allowed him. ¹⁶ After Jesus was baptized, he came up from the water and behold, the heavens were opened (for him), and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove (and) coming upon him. ¹⁷ And a voice came from the heavens, saying, “This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased.”

The First Temptation of Christ. Brian Stoffregen has an interesting insight about righteousness as “do, perform” what God requires of us.

John, by trying to prevent the baptism, tempts Jesus not to do all that God requires of him. He tempts Jesus to assume his proper position now: to be the more powerful one; to baptize with the judgmental Holy Spirit and fire; to meet John’s need. I don’t think that these are too dissimilar to the devil’s temptations that occur immediately after the baptism (4:1-11) — temptations for Jesus to use his power now, for his own glory; and avoid his emptying and eventually the pain and suffering of the cross.

What does God require of Jesus? Is it just the baptism? I think that baptism is only part of the picture of Jesus identifying with sinful humanity: the Sinless One is baptized for the forgiveness of sin; the Holy One eats/fellowships with unholy sinners; the Immortal One dies on a cross as a criminal. It is part of the emptying of himself — the God who becomes truly human.

In fact, the “emptying,” occurs even earlier in Matthew. We have been told that the child has been conceived from the Holy Spirit. We have been told that “Jesus” will save his people from their sins. We have been told that he will be called “Immanuel” — God is with us. What happens to this very special child after his birth? He has to flee for his life. The one, who will save his people, has to be saved from Herod. The one who is “God-with-us” has to flee from the Promised Land. He (and his parents) are acting as people who have been emptied of power.

This thought is highly reflective of Philippians 2:6-11 in which Jesus empties himself “becoming obedient to death, even death on a cross.”  This passage from Philippians strongly echoes Is 53:12 which speaks of the “Suffering Servant” of God – one who does what is right before God and thus fulfills all righteousness.

The Baptism of Jesus. The scene is filled with eschatological overtones. The heavens are opened, a voice comes from heaven, the Spirit is given. The Judaism of Jesus’ day  tended to regard all of these elements as the revelatory gifts of God that happened in now-past OT times and that no longer occurred. But they also believed those signs would reappear in the “last days.”  What becomes clear is it not the baptism that is central to Matthew’s  narrative, but the events that follow. Those events reveal the beginning of the long-awaited eschatological events of salvation.

Different scholars will give varying accents and background to the three signs – mostly surrounding the idea of fulfilling all righteousness. In Jesus’ baptism, he and John fulfilled the OT by revealing the Messiah to Israel. This baptism, an inauguration of Jesus’ ministry to Israel, led immediately to OT fulfillment in that the Spirit, as a dove, came upon the Messiah (Isa 11:1–2; 42:1; cf. Matt 12:18, 28) and the Father endorsed his Son in the voice from heaven (Ps 2:7; Isa 42:1; cf. Matt 17:5). In baptism, Jesus as the servant proclaimed and exemplified the righteousness envisioned by the prophets. Additionally he identified in baptism with the repentant righteous remnant within the nation of Israel (Mt 3:5–6). His baptism demonstrated his humility and anticipated his ministry to lowly but repentant people (cf. 2:23; 11:19; 12:20; 21:5).

The evocative sign of the dove is not reducible to one single explanation, but among them, consider the hovering of the Spirit above the water of creation (and the flood). In the eschatological event of Jesus’ baptism, Matthew envisions a “new creation,” a genesis if you will – the very word and idea with which Matthew begins the genealogy (1:1, 18).  Clearly the descend of the Spirit also points to the fulfillment of messianic prophecies in Isaiah (Isa 11:2, 4:1, 61:1). This is not to say that Jesus has been without the Spirit (Mt 1:18, 20), but that now Jesus is commissioned to undertake his messianic mission.

What does this mean?  From Matthew’s perspective the story of Jesus’ baptism is a Christological narrative. The heavenly voice declares Jesus to be both Son of God and Suffering Servant – titles which to Matthew are related and not different things about Jesus.  Without minimizing “Son of God” Matthew accents the picture of Jesus as Servant here (v.17) only to fully cite the Is 42:1 passage in Mt 12:18-21 (the Transfiguration).  It is this identification which shapes the nature of Jesus mission – precisely as the mightier one who will baptize with Spirit and fire, precisely as the Son of God and Son of David who will submits to John and to the will of God.  It is as Son and Servant he is the obedient One – obedient even unto death on the cross.

Notes

Matthew 3:16 the heavens were opened (for him): new possibilities of communication between God and humankind (cf. Ezek 1:1; 2 Macc 3:24 ff; Jn 1:51; Acts 7:55-56; 10:11; Rev 11:19; 19-11-21)

Matthew 3:16 the Spirit of God descending like a dove: lit. “like a dove does.” The phrasing echoes the Spirit of God moving upon the water (Gen 1:2) another symbol of new communication between God and humankind

This sign parallels the ‘call’ of many of the Old Testament prophets. Mark’s account, and less clearly Luke’s, suggests that it was a purely private experience; John (1:32–34) indicates that John the Baptist at least saw the Spirit descending like a dove, though the accompanying revelation to him was not the divine pronouncement recorded in the Synoptics. Matthew’s account is similar to Mark’s. The third-person form of the proclamation (“this is my beloved son” in v. 17) suggests a public revelation, but this is hard to reconcile with the fact that Jesus’ Messianic status was not publicly stated throughout his ministry, and was only grasped by his closest disciples much later (16:13–20); Matthew therefore, while assimilating the words to those at the transfiguration (17:5), probably intends them to be understood as addressed to Jesus only. The whole focus of the account is on Jesus’ ‘commissioning’, not on a public revelation of his mission.

Matthew 3:17 a voice from heaven: The third symbol of new communications between God and humanity. This is my dearly loved Son. The heavenly voice confirms and interprets the import of the heavenly vision of the Spirit’s descent. The words of the heavenly voice express the Father’s approval of the Son (cf. 17:5) in words blending the suffering servant motif from Isa 42:1 with the sonship motif of Ps 2:7. The servant motif interprets the baptism by which Jesus identified with the righteous remnant of Israel. The sonship motif recalls the unique circumstances of Jesus’ conception and infancy (1:16, 18–25; 2:15) and sets the scene for Satan’s tests (4:3, 6). The sonship motif also implies Jesus’ Davidic connections (1:1; cf. 2 Sam 7:13–14; Ps 89:27).

Sources

• G. K. Beale and D. A. Carson, Commentary on the New Testament Use of the Old Testament (Grand Rapids, MI;  Nottingham, UK: Baker Academic;  Apollos, 2007) p. 14
• Eugene Boring, The Gospel of Matthew in The New Interpreter’s Bible, Vol. VIII (Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press, 1994) pp. 159-61 (154-58)
• R.T. France, Matthew: An Introduction and Commentary in the Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, Vol. 1, ed. Leon Morris  (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1989) pp. 99-101
• R.T. France, The Gospel of Matthew in the New International Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans Publishing. 2007) pp.96-124
• Daniel J. Harrington, The Gospel of Matthew, vol. 1 of Sacra Pagina, ed. Daniel J. Harrington (Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 1991) pp. 58-61
• Daniel J. Harrington, “Matthew” in The Collegeville Bible Commentary, eds. Diane Bergant and Robert J. Karris (Collegeville, Minn.: Liturgical Press, 1989) p.867
• John P. Meier, Matthew, New Testament Message 3 (Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 1990) pp. 21-28
• Brian Stoffregen, “Brian P. Stoffregen Exegetical Notes” at www.crossmarks.com
• D. Turner and D.L. Bock, Matthew and Mark in the Cornerstone Biblical Commentary, vol. 11 (Carol Stream, IL: Tyndale House Publishers, 2005) pp. 62-64

Dictionaries – Gerhard Kittel, Gerhard Friedrich and Geoffrey William Bromiley, Theological Dictionary of the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: W.B. Eerdmans, 1995).  G. Schrenk, dikaiosýnē, 2:178–225