1.
Jesus' Baptism
1.1. Selective Bibliography
1.2. Accounts
of Jesus' Baptism
1.3. John
and Jesus
1.4. The
Date of Jesus' Baptism
2. Jesus' Temptations
2.1. Selective Bibliography
2.2. Sources for Jesus' Temptations
G. Beasley-Murray, Baptism in the New Testament, 1962; J.D.G. Dunn, Jesus and the Spirit, 1975); Kilian McDonnell, The Baptism of Jesus in the Jordan: The Trinitarian and Cosmic Order of Salvation, 1996); S. McKnight, A Light Among the Gentiles, 1991).
1.2. Accounts of Jesus' Baptism
Accounts of Jesus' baptism are found in Mark 1:9-11 = Matt 3:13-17 = Luke 3:21-22; Matthew, however, has additional material not found in Mark or Luke (Matt 3:14-15).
| Mark
1:9-11 9
At that time Jesus came from Nazareth in Galilee and was baptized
by John in the Jordan. 10 As Jesus was coming up out of the water, he saw heaven being torn open and the Spirit descending on him like a dove. 11 And a voice came from heaven: "You are my Son, whom I love; with you I am well pleased." |
Matt
3:13-17 13
Then Jesus came from Galilee to the Jordan to be baptized by John.
14 But John tried to deter him, saying, "I need to be baptized
by you, and do you come to me?" 15 Jesus replied, "Let it
be so now; it is proper for us to do this to fulfill all righteousness."
Then John consented. 16 As soon as Jesus was baptized, he went
up out of the water. At that moment heaven was opened, and
he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove and lighting on
him. 17 And a voice from heaven said, "This is my Son, whom
I love; with him I am well pleased."
|
Luke
3:21-22 21
When all the people were being baptized, Jesus was baptized too.
And as he was praying, heaven was opened 22 and the Holy Spirit descended on him in bodily form like a dove. And a voice came from heaven: "You are my Son, whom I love; with you I am well pleased." |
Jesus sought baptism from John the Baptist (Mark 1:9 = Matt 3:13 = Luke 3:21). On the assumption of Markan priority, it clear that Matthew and Luke have used Mark as a source. The fact that there are minor agreements between Matthew and Luke against Mark, however, may suggest that Matthew and Luke had access to another account of Jesus' baptism and were influenced by this when redacting their Markan source. The minor agreements between Matthew and Luke are as follows: 1. Both change the Markan aorist "he was baptized" (ebaptisthê) into aorist participles (Matt: baptistheis; Luke: baptisthentos); 2. Both make no reference to Jesus' being baptized in the Jordan by John (Mark 1:9 = Matt 3:15 = Luke 21); 3. Both have the verb "to open" (anoigein) to describe the phenomenon in the sky, rather than the verb "to tear" (skizein) as found in Mark; 4. Both use the name Jesus in the statement that Jesus was baptized, whereas Mark does not; 5. Both use the prepositional phrase "upon him" (ep' auton) rather than Mark's "towards him" (eis auton); 6. Both agree in word order against Mark by having the verb precede the comparison of Spirit's descent to that of a dove: "the (Holy) Spirit (bodily) descended like a dove," rather than Mark's "the Spirit like a dove descended." Admittedly, the evidence is not overwelmingly compelling to conclude that there is a non-Markan version of Jesus' baptism influencing the Matthean and Lukan redaction of Mark; rather, the conclusion has only a moderate degree of probability. But if there is another version of Jesus' baptism, it is possible that Matthew's interpolation of a dialogue between Jesus and John that serves to explain Jesus' request to receive John's baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins (Matt 3:14-15) may derive from that non-Markan source. So, contrary to what some commentators hold, the author of Matthew would not have written this dialogue between Jesus and John de novo, with the apologetic aim of correcting what he considered to be a discrepancy in Mark: that Jesus needed forgiveness for sins.
In Matthew's account, John the Baptist attempts to discourage Jesus from being baptized; he says that it is he who has need to be baptized by Jesus, not Jesus by him. John's reaction presupposes that he knows who Jesus is. (Indeed, according to Luke 1:36, 41, John and Jesus are cousins so that it is highly probable that they have met prior to this encounter.) By his statement, "I need to be baptized by you, and do you come to me?" John probably means that, since he is righteous, Jesus should be the one baptizing rather than he. Jesus' reply is, "Allow it for now, for thus it is fitting for us to do this in order to fulfill all righteousness." In this context, "righteousness" (dikaiosunê) means what God requires, so that Jesus sees his submission to John's baptism as fulfilling completely God's requirement for him ("to fulfil all righteousness"). The unanswered question, however, is why Jesus' baptism at the hands of John is a requirement for him. It is difficult to know for certain. Probably, Jesus' undergoes baptism in order to identify himself vicariously with Israel, even though he himself did not need to repent and be forgiven (hence John's surprise at seeing that Jesus was a candidate for baptism). Such an identification with Israel is a presupposition of the assumption of his messianic function.
Not even
the most critical Jesus researcher doubts that Jesus allowed himself
to be baptized by John, appealing to what is called the criterion
of embarrassment to support this conclusion. This critierion states
that when a saying or narrative is theologically problematic for
the church then it is probably authentic, on the assumption that
the church is unlikely to have created such a tradition. In this
case, the church is unlikely to have invented the idea that Jesus
agrees to John's baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of
sins since it would have to explain how a supposedly sinless Jesus
would qualify for John's baptism (see E.P. Sanders, Jesus
and Judaism, 11; J. Crossan, The Historical Jesus: The
Life of a Mediterranean Jewish Peasant, 234). (It is claimed
that Matt 3:14-15 is an attempt to deal with the embarassment.)
Unfortunately for critical scholars there are few examples of
the successful application of the criterion of embarrasment. It
should also be noted that any successful application of the criterion
of embarassment supports the claim for the general historical
reliability of the Jesus tradition in the gospels: if the church
was so unrestrained in its handling of Jesus tradition then one
would never expect there to be Jesus traditions that were an "embarassment"
to the church. Perhaps it is more credible that what scholars
consider "embarassments" are not that at all, but another
explanation is required. |
All three gospels record that subsequent to Jesus' baptism the heavens opened and the Spirit descended as a dove. The idea of the Spirit depicted as a dove (Matt / Mark) or in the form of a dove (Luke) is not found in the Old Testament or in second-Temple Jewish literature. This appears to be unique to the gospels, in which case there would be no pre-understanding of the symbolism. That the Davidic Messiah would be endued with the Spirit was foretold by the prophet Isaiah (Isa 11:2 "The spirit of Yahweh will rest on him"), and formed part of the expectation of at least some second-Temple Jews (see Ps. Sol. 17:37 "for God will make him mighty by means of (his) holy spirit, and wise by means of the spirit of understanding"; 1QSb 5:25 "[counsel] and everlasting strength, spirit, and fear of God") (see also Jesus' messianic interpretation of Isa 61:1-2 in Luke 4:18-19). Likewise, in 1 Enoch 49:1-4; 51:3; 62:2, the elect one, is said to be indwelt by "the spirit of wisdom, and the spirit that gives insight, and the spirit of understanding and of strength," which is a citation of Isa 11:2. Jesus' reception of the Spirit at his baptism fulfils this aspect of Jewish messianic expectation. It seems that the reception of the Spirit marked the beginning of Jesus' public ministry; apparently he needed the Spirit for what he was about to do, just as Isa 11:1-5 implies. It should also be noted that Jesus is once again referred to as the son of God, which would conventionally be understood to mean Davidic Messiah. At this point ultimate presuppositions influence the process of historical reconstruction, because the one who does not believe that Jesus was sent from God will tend to deny the gospels' claim that the Holy Spirit visibly descended upon Jesus in this manner.
At this time a voice from heaven was heard saying "this is" or "you are" "my beloved son in whom I am well-pleased." This phenomenon is known in early rabbinic Judaism as the giving of a bath qol, a "daughter of the voice," the speaking of God from heaven as the verification that what was happening or what someone said was authorized by God or in line with God's will. The early rabbinic view was that the Holy Spirit had been withdrawn from Israel but that God occasionally spoke by the bath qol. In Jesus' case, the Spirit is given to Jesus at his baptism and a bath qol is given as further testimony that he was sent from God. To declare that Jesus is the son would probably be understood to mean that Jesus is the Davidic Messiah, since, as already indicated, the term "son [of God]" became a synonym for Davidic Messiah. The statement "You are / this is my beloved son" alludes to Ps 2:7, which was interpreted messianically in Jesus' day (see Son of God).
It is probable that what is said of Jesus immediately after his baptism bears the influence of Isa 42:1 (the introductory verse of the first Servant Song): "Behold, my Servant, whom I uphold, my chosen one in whom my soul delights. I have put my Spirit upon him." Like the Servant, Jesus receives the Spirit. Also, the phrase "with him / whom I am well pleased" (en soi / hô eudokêsa) is similar to what is said of the Servant: "in whom my soul delights" (LXX prosedexato auton hê psuchê). Moreover, in Matt 12:17-18, Isa 42:1 is quoted and the verb used is not prosedexato as in the LXX, but eudokêsen: "This was to fulfill what was spoken through Isaiah the prophet: "Behold, my servant whom I have chosen; my beloved in whom my soul is well-pleased; I will put my spirit upon him etc." This makes an allusion to Isa 42:1 in Mark 1:11 = Matt 3:17 = Luke 3:22 even more probable. An obstacle to accepting that there is an allusion to Isa 42:1 in the account of Jesus' baptism and reception of the Spirit is the fact that Jesus is not called servant but son. It has been argued, however, that the original Hebrew ebed ("servant") was translated as the Greek huios ("son") rather than pais ("son" or "servant"), the LXX's choice for translating ebed, which is feasible, because in Greek huios and pais are easily confused. Yet it still needs to be explained how an allusion to the Isaian servant would be allowed to become obscure in the history of the synoptic tradition. In short, it is best to see the influence of both Ps 2:7 and Isa 42:1 on this synoptic tradition, so that Jesus is to be understood as both the Davidic Messiah and as the Isaian Servant.
|
Theater at Caesarea Maritima
|
John's reluctance to baptize Jesus in Matt 3:14 implies that John knew Jesus before he baptized him. Yet John's statement in John 1:33 makes it clear that he did not know that Jesus was the Davidic Messiah until after his baptism and reception of the Spirit.
John 1:29-34 29 The next day he saw Jesus coming to him and said, "Behold, the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world! 30 "This is he on behalf of whom I said, 'After me comes a man who has a higher rank than I, for he existed before me.' 31 "I did not recognize Him, but so that He might be manifested to Israel, I came baptizing in water." 32 John testified saying, "I have seen the Spirit descending as a dove out of heaven, and he remained upon him. 33 "I did not recognize him, but he who sent me to baptize in water said to me, 'He upon whom you see the Spirit descending and remaining upon him, this is the one who baptizes in the Holy Spirit.' 34 "I myself have seen, and have testified that this is the Son of God." |
1.4. The Date of Jesus' Baptism
According to the prophet Daniel, there will elapse 483 years (sevens "sevens" and sixty-two sevens) between the issuing of the decree to rebuild the Temple to the coming of the Anointed One (Dan 9:25). There were, in fact, three official decree to rebuild the Temple: 1. The decree of Cyrus (Ezra 1:2-4; 6:3-5) in 538/37 BCE; 2. The decree of Artaxerxes (Ezra 7:11-26) in 458 BCE; 3. The second decree of Artaxerxes (Neh 2:5-8, 17, 18) in 445 BCE (see L. Wood, A Commentary on Daniel, 252). Most likely, the second is intended by Dan 9:25, which would put the date for the coming of the Messiah as 26, on the assumption that solar years are meant (keeping in mind that between 1 BCE and 1 is only one year). This is the estimated date of Jesus' baptism, which marks the beginning of his ministry. That Jesus was baptized in 26 is confirmed by John 2:20. In response to Jesus' claim that he would destroy the Temple and rebuild it in three days, Jesus' opponents said, "It has taken forty-six years to build this temple, and you are going to raise it in three days?" It is known that Herod began to rebuild the Temple in the eighteenth year of his reign or 20/19 BCE (Ant. 15.380) (Herod assumed kingship in 37 BCE), so that forty-six years after 20/19 is 26/27. Jesus' baptism would have been probably a few months earlier than this incident in the Temple. Luke dates the appearance of John the Baptist to the fifteen year of the reign of Tiberius, when Pontius Pilate was in charge of Judea (Luke 3:1). Tiberius became emperor upon the death of Augustus in 14, but, according to Roman sources, he was co-regent with Augustus (over certain provinces) beginning either in 11 (= A.U.C. 764) (Velleius Paterculus 2.121) or 12 (A.U.C. 765) (Suetonius, Tib. vit. 21) (A.U.C = ab urbe condita [from the founding of the city, i.e., of Rome]). Dating from the begining of his co-regency with Augustus, the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius would be either 26 or 27 (It is not certain from which day of the year Luke assumes that the new year begins, since there were different practices in the Roman world.) Pontius Pilate began his appointment as praefectus of Judea in 26. Luke's dating, therefore, can be made consistent with the chronological data from the Gospel of John and the prediction of the appearance of Anointed One in Dan 9:25.
Questions
Why does Jesus seek baptism from John? What extraordinary event happens at Jesus' baptism? What is the significance of this event?
After his baptism and before he begins to proclaim that the Kingdom of God has drawn near, Jesus is tempted by Satan in the Judean wilderness. The gospel writers assume the existence of Satan as the enemy of God and as opposing God's purposes for Israel (see Worldview Shared by Jesus and his Contemporaries). Scholars who deny the existence of Satan, if they believe there is any historical basis to the accounts of Jesus' temptations, tend to de-objectify them, interpreting Jesus' "temptations" as some type of personal religious crisis that Jesus experienced.
J. Dupont, "L'origine du récits des tentations de Jésus" RB 73 (1966) 30-76; B. Gerhardson, The Testing of God's Son, 1966; P. Doble, "The Temptations," ExpT 72 (1960-61) 91-93; U.W. Mauser, Christ in the Wilderness, 1963; A.B. Taylor, "Decision in the Desert: The Temptation of Jesus in the Light of Deuteronomy," Int 40 (1969) 300-306.
|
Judean Wilderness from Tekoa According to Mark 1:12, after his baptism, Jesus was compelled to go into the Judea desert by the Spirit, and there he was tempted by Satan. |
2.2. Sources for Jesus' Temptations
Information on Jesus' temptations is found in Mark 1:12-13 and in Matt 4:1-11 / Luke 4:1-13; the Matthean and Lukan accounts are much longer than the Markan. In each account we find that Jesus was compelled to go to the wilderness by the Spirit to be tempted. (Luke first says that Jesus was full of the Spirit [Luke 4:1].) The wilderness should probably be understood negatively as a cursed place where demons dwell and so under the control of Satan (Isa 13:19-22; Ezek 34:25; Luke 11:24-28; 1QM 1). This means that by entering into the wilderness Jesus enters into the realm of Satan. Mark's statement "And he was with the animals" is comprehensible on the assumption that wild animals are sometimes placed in close association with demons (T. Issa. 7:7; T. Naph. 8:4; T. Benj. 5:2). Mark does not give any details concerning the nature of Jesus' temptations, unlike Matthew and Luke. Many exegetes assume that the authors of Matthew and Luke independently had access to the so-called Q-source version of the Temptation Story, the only non-Markan version, so that one or the other changed the original order of Jesus' temptations. In the absence of proof for such a single document as the Q-source, it is more probable that each had access to a different version of the Temptation story, whatever form these took, oral or written.
| Mark
1:12-13 12
At once the Spirit sent him out into the desert, 13 and
he was in the desert forty days, being tempted by Satan.
He was with the wild animals, and angels attended him.
|
Matt
4:1-11 1 Then Jesus was led by the Spirit into the desert to be tempted by the devil. 2 After fasting forty days and forty nights, he was hungry. 3 The tempter came to him and said, "If you are the son of God, tell these stones to become bread." 4 Jesus answered, "It is written: `Man does not live on bread alone, but on every word that comes from the mouth of God.' " 5 Then the devil took him to the holy city and had him stand on the highest point of the temple. 6 "If you are the Son of God," he said, "throw yourself down. For it is written: "`He will command his angels concerning you, and they will lift you up in their hands, so that you will not strike your foot against a stone.' " 7 Jesus answered him, "It is also written: `Do not put the Lord your God to the test.' " 8 Again, the devil took him to a very high mountain and showed him all the kingdoms of the world and their splendor. 9 "All this I will give you," he said, "if you will bow down and worship me." 10 Jesus said to him, "Away from me, Satan! For it is written: `Worship the Lord your God, and serve him only.' " 11 Then the devil left him, and angels came and attended him.
|
Luke
4:1-13 1 Jesus, full of the Holy Spirit, returned from the Jordan and was led by the Spirit in the desert, 2 where for forty days he was tempted by the devil. He ate nothing during those days, and at the end of them he was hungry. 3 The devil said to him, "If you are the Son of God, tell this stone to become bread." 4 Jesus answered, "It is written: `Man does not live on bread alone.' " 5 The devil led him up to a high place and showed him in an instant all the kingdoms of the world. 6 And he said to him, "I will give you all their authority and splendor, for it has been given to me, and I can give it to anyone I want to. 7 So if you worship me, it will all be yours." 8 Jesus answered, "It is written: `Worship the Lord your God and serve him only.' " 9 The devil led him to Jerusalem and had him stand on the highest point of the temple. "If you are the Son of God," he said, "throw yourself down from here. 10 For it is written: "`He will command his angels concerning you to guard you carefully; 11 they will lift you up in their hands, so that you will not strike your foot against a stone.' " 12 Jesus answered, "It says: `Do not put the Lord your God to the test.' " 13 When the devil had finished all this tempting, he left him until an opportune time.
|
Jesus was in
tempted in three ways, and, in each case, responded by citing a passage
from the Torah
(following Luke's order).
- He is tempted to turn stone to bread after having fasted for forty days; Satan tempts him to do this on the assumption that Jesus is "the son of God": "If you are the Son of God, tell these stones to become bread." By "son of God" is meant at least that Jesus is the Davidic Messiah, but perhaps more is meant than this. In response Jesus quotes Deut 8:3 that human beings are not to live by bread alone but by every word that comes from the mouth of God:
- He is tempted to bow to Satan in worship in exchange for all the kingdoms of the world and their glory; Jesus accepts the premise that these kingdoms are indeed Satan's to give. His response is to quote Deut 6:13 that human beings should worship God alone.
- He is tempted to jump off "the highest point of the Temple" (to pterugion tou hierou) to test God; Satan quotes Ps 91:11-12 to the effect that God would not let Jesus be harmed. Jesus' response is to quote from Deut 6:16: that human beings should not put God to the test. To put God to the test is to demand something from God unnecessarily and even defiantly. (According to Hegessippus, as quoted by Euesbius, James the Just was thrown off the pterugion tou hierou / naou, which is probably the same place in the Temple to which Jesus was taken [H.E. 2.23.4-18]).
|
Temple Mount In this photograph, the Temple mount is viewed from the southeast, from the Mount of Olives. To the west of the Temple was the Tyropoeon valley and to the south and east was the Kidron valley. "The high point of the Temple" could be the southeast portion of the outer wall, since ground level would be the bottom of the Kidron valley, thereby making it the highest point of the Temple measured from the level ground to the top of the wall. According to Josephus, if one stood on the roof of the Royal portico and looked down into the Kidron valley one would become dizzy, so great was the height (Ant. 15.11.5; 410) |
Jesus' temptations were Satan's attempt to cause Jesus to sin, which presumably would have disqualified Jesus as the Davidic Messiah. This raises the question of whether Jesus could have sinned. Based on the principle of analogy—judged by our own experience—he could have; but perhaps we cannot apply the principle of analogy to Jesus in every case, because Jesus in some respects was not like us.
| Satan is depicted in 2 Chron 21:1 as tempting David to sin by taking a census (see Sam 24:1). Satan's role as tempter, however, becomes much more prominent in the second-Temple period (Satan is known by various names). In the review of Israel's history in the Damascus Document (CD), Belial is said to be responsible for raising up "Johne" and his brother (i.e., Jannes and Jambres) to oppose Moses and Aaron (CD 5.18-19); in fact Belial opposes Israel, in general, during the period before the eschaton (CD 4.12-14). In Jub. 11.5, prince Mastema, with the assistance of spirits under his charge, lead human beings to make and worship idols as well as make war; in fact, after the flood Mastema successfully requests of God that he be left one tenth of the evil spirits in order to lead human beings into sin (Jub. 10.8; see 19.28). Similarly, prince Mastema is said to be behind God's testing of Abraham to determine whether he would be willing to sacrifice his son (Jub. 17.6; see also 10.8). In Apocalypse of Moses, Adam attributes Cain's decision to kill his brother, Abel, to the adversary, by whom is meant Satan (2). In Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs, Satan is credited blamed for being the instigator of sin. In T. Judah 19.4, Judah explains to his children that "the prince of error" blinded him, so that he was not able to recognize his own sins (see also T. Sim. 2.7); the patriarch Dan blames one of "the spirits of Beliar" at work in him, the "spirit of anger," for influencing him to harm Joseph (T. Dan 1.7). T. Benj. 6.1 claims that the good man is not under the control of "the deceitful spirit Beliar," but is guided by the angel of peace. |
Why does Satan tempt Jesus? What are Jesus' three temptations and how does he respond to them?
