Mark 1.9-11,
Matthew 3.13-17,
Luke 3.21-22.
Baptism, i.e. ritual washing, was usually for Jews who were
And John the baptist co-opted the ritual too, and used it on sinners
Mark 1.9 KWL - It happens in these days Jesus comes from Nazareth of the Galilee,
- and is baptized by John in the Jordan.
Matthew 3.13-15 KWL 13 Then Jesus comes from the Galilee to the Jordan,- to John, to be baptized by him.
14 John is preventing him, saying,- “I need to be baptized by you¹!
- And you¹ come to me?”
15 In reply Jesus told him, “Just permit it.- It’s appropriate for us to fulfill everything that’s right.”
- So John permitted him.
As you see, when Jesus came south from the Galilee, went to the Jordan, and wanted baptism, John rightly objected. I’ll write it again: Rightly objected. John’s baptism was for sinners. Was Jesus a sinner? Nope. Did Jesus need to repent? Nope; never sinned, so nothing to repent of.
Well we would, but we’d never call Jesus a hypocrite. So we usually look the other way at this, and give Jesus a free pass.
Yet at the same time, continue to teach that Jesus didn’t need repentance, and underwent baptism so he could be a good example for Christians who actually need to repent. In other words, we teach he was totally behaving like something he’s not—that he was acting like a hypocrite.
Should we be teaching such a thing in the first place? If Jesus is no hypocrite, should we be teaching anything at all which could, on closer inspection, easily make Jesus out to be a hypocrite?
I would say no; and also Jesus has a legitimate, non-hypocritical reason for wanting baptism. Let’s get to that.
When to properly do things for show.
This isn’t the only time in the gospels Jesus does something for show. When he prayed in front of Lazarus’s tomb, he said this:
John 11.41-42 CSB 41 So they removed the stone. Then Jesus raised his eyes and said, “Father, I thank you that you heard me.42 I know that you always hear me, but because of the crowd standing here I said this, so that they may believe you sent me.”
Jesus was saying this for show. And honestly admitting, right in front of everyone, he’s saying this for show. And why—so the crowd would believe. It’s a performance, and Jesus isn’t hiding that fact.
A hypocrite would, and that’s the difference between an actor and a con artist, between a mentalist and a psychic. We know an actor is playing a role; nobody’s hiding that fact. We know a mentalist is showing us a trick; the mentalist isn’t pretending otherwise. Whereas a con artist wants to convince everyone they actually are what they claim to be. A psychic pretends they have actual spiritual powers. One is trying to entertain or demonstrate, and the other is trying to defraud.
Jesus’s baptism is meant to demonstrate something all of us oughta do. Jesus doesn’t need baptizing, but we surely do. And of course if Jesus were never baptized, there’d be Christians who insist we don’t need to ever be baptized either; if Jesus didn’t do it, neither should we. I run into anti-Pentecostals from time to time who reject
When people really don’t wanna do something, any excuse will do to get ’em off the hook. Jesus’s example looks like a pretty decent argument in their favor. So Jesus didn’t provide them an out: He got baptized too. Even though we know he didn’t need it. Baptism’s so important for our sake, he went through with it anyway.
He didn’t need to die either. But we know how that turned out.
When Jesus got adopted.
When Jesus came out of the water, the Father adopted him. I’m using that word in the ancient Roman sense. Paternity wasn’t established back then by blood or
The Romans called this adoptio, “choosing.” They put it off till the child reached adulthood—age 13, in those days—and put on adult clothing for the first time. Then the father would declare himself their father, the adoptee would acknowledge it, and the father would change the adoptee’s name (sometimes just their nomen/“family name,” sometimes their entire name) to his. Romans could, and did, adopt anyone. Usually for purposes of inheritance. In fact Romans could be adopted by multiple people: Their biological father who raised them, and later some uncle who wanted them to be his heir, and maybe even later a family friend who wanted them to be his heir. Romans could wind up with loads of “fathers.”
Israelis did this at circumcision. The purported father, or his stand-in, named the boy. At Jesus’s circumcision, Joseph named him Jesus.
The other thing about Roman adoption: A man could adopt someone at any age. Julius Cæsar adopted his grandnephew Gaius Octavius in his will, when the young man was 19. Jesus was, as Luke reckoned, about 30
Mark 1.10-11 KWL 10 Coming straight up out of the water,- Jesus sees the skies split apart,
- and the Spirit, like a pigeon,
- descending upon him.
11 A sound is made, coming from the skies:- “You’re¹ my beloved son.
- I approve of you¹.”
Matthew 3.16-17 KWL 16 Once baptized, Jesus comes straight up out of the water.- Look: The skies are thrown open.
- Jesus sees God’s Spirit descending like a pigeon,
- coming upon him.
17 Look: A sound from the skies saying,- “This is my beloved son.
- I approve of him.”
Luke 3.21-22 KWL 21 While baptizing all the people,- as Jesus is baptized and praying,
- God happens to throw open the skies,
22 to descend the Holy Spirit upon Jesus,- in bodily form like a pigeon,
- and to make a sound from the skies:
- “You’re¹ my beloved son.
- I approve of you¹.”
The John version of the story is uniquely different, so
Jesus is the Father’s begotten son, but when the Father publicly declared Jesus “my beloved son,” and approved of him, in front of John and everyone else that day, this was a very public adoption as his son. So, Jesus has two adoptive fathers: Joseph of Nazareth, who adopted and raised him; and our heavenly Father, who sent and adopted him. (If you wanna get technical, three fathers, ’cause Jesus was conceived by the Holy Spirit.
I realize I’m using the word adoption, but I don’t mean
As for the rest of us, we’re not the Father’s biological kids; we’re his creations. He made us, not fathered us. That is, till he adopts us. Then we become his literal children
In our culture, adoption is very different, which is why we’re not always aware how important adoption is in the New Testament. There are certain people who claim to be Christian, who think one’s adopted children aren’t really their children; who will insist on calling these kids “your adopted kids” instead of “your kids.” They invent some ridiculous stigma to adoption which Romans didn’t have, God doesn’t have, and we ought not have.
Jesus’s “hidden life.”
As
Goofy stuff. ’Cause the stories in those apocryphal gospels sound like pagan myths. But Jesus’s behavior in the New Testament sounds like the acts of prophets in the Old Testament. Jesus’s teachings in the gospels sound way more like the Hebrew religion than any pagan religion. His healings and exorcisms looked just like other healings and exorcisms the ancient Israelis were familiar with. In order to claim Jesus was a gnostic magician, you have to rewrite his story entirely. As they did.
The reason for the hidden life? There are two. First of all, as I said, it’s none of our business. Jesus and his family were permitted some privacy to live normal, ordinary lives. Jesus got to experience humanity without our crazy scrutiny over every single last one of his actions. We misinterpret him enough as it is with what he intentionally taught. Imagine how much we could get wrong by hyper-analyzing all the stuff he casually did.
Second, it’s irrelevant to the purposes of the gospels.
Before this point, Jesus worked as a craftsman (Greek
With Jesus’s anointing, the hidden life ended. Now Jesus would proclaim the kingdom—in word, and with mighty deeds. As he did from then on.
