The Baptism of Christ, or: The Anointing of the King

By David J. MacLeod [1] [2]

Introduction

In the Book of 1 Samuel (16:1–13) the prophet Samuel was told to go to Bethlehem to anoint a new king. When he arrived in Bethlehem he invited the elders of the village and the family of Jesse to a sacrifice. He then had Jesse bring forward his sons, but the Lord said that none of the seven was His choice to be king. When Samuel asked Jesse if he had any other children, Jesse said that he had one more, his youngest, who was out tending the sheep. Samuel told Jesse to send him, and when he arrived Samuel saw that he was physically fit and handsome in appearance. The Lord then spoke to Samuel, “Arise, anoint him; for this is he” (v. 12). Samuel then took a flask of olive oil [3] and poured it on David’s head. The text then says that “the Spirit of the Lord came mightily upon David from that day forward.” This anointing with oil consecrated or set David apart for service as king, and the coming of the Spirit empowered him for the task. [4]

In Old Testament times three official groups, namely, prophets (1 Kings 19:16; Isa. 61:1), priests (Exod. 30:30; 40:13, 15), and kings (1 Sam. 2:10, 35; 10:1; 15:1) were commonly inaugurated into their offices by a ceremony of unction or anointing. The word anoint in Hebrew is מָשַׁח (mās̆aḥ) from which we get the word Messiah (ֶָמשִׁיחַ mās̆îaḥ) or “anointed one.” The Greek word is χρίω (chriō, “I anoint”) from which is derived Χριστός or “Christ,” which also means “anointed one.”

It is striking that the early Christian writer, Eusebius, “the father of church history,” referred to the anointed officers of Israel — the prophets, priests, and kings — as “types…of the only true Christ.” In other words, he saw the offices as foreshadowing the work of Christ in the New Testament. [5]

The psalms of David (2:2; 89:39, 52) and the Old Testament prophets (cf. Dan. 9:25–26) looked on to the future when the Messiah, the Christ, the “Anointed King” would establish His everlasting kingdom upon the earth (Dan. 7:13–14). In Matthew 3 Jesus came to the baptism of John the Baptist, among the repentant ones of Israel responsive to John’s proclamation, to begin His messianic task in its fullness as He interpreted it from the Old Testament. [6] The baptism of Jesus was His anointing as king. Jesus became the Christ, [7] the “Anointed One” of God, not only nominated to the Messianic throne, but actually equipped with the fullness of the Holy Spirit. [8]

The Account of the Baptism of Christ

The Historical Background of the Account [9]

Our Lord had been born in Bethlehem sometime in mid-winter of 3/2 bc. [10] He was born during the reign of Emperor Augustus and, while the Pax Romana (“peace of Rome”) girdled the globe, He grew up in the town of Nazareth in the province of Galilee. When Augustus died in 14 ad, Jesus was in His mid-teen years. During that time He led a quiet life accompanying His parents to the festivals in Jerusalem and learning the trade of a carpenter. We also know that He was becoming a very knowledgeable student of the Scriptures (cf. John 7:15). When Augustus died many were troubled fearing the end of the Roman peace and an orderly empire. But Jesus was thinking of another peace and another empire, and biding His time.

Some fifteen years later the voice of prophecy, long silent in Israel, rang out in the Judean wilderness through the lips of John the Baptist. [11] Crowds thronged to hear John’s message of the coming kingdom and the need to prepare by repentance for the forgiveness of sins (Matt. 3:5–6; cf. Mark 1:4). As they confessed their sins the people were plunged beneath the waters of the Jordan. It was a kind of rite of initiation for those who waited expectantly for the coming Messiah and His kingdom (cf. Luke 3:15). The baptism was a cleansing bath — it symbolized the forgiveness of sins (cf. the similar symbolism in Christian baptism in Acts 22:16). [12]

How soon after John began preaching Jesus heard of him we do not know. Eventually, however, the news of the revival (“a powerful Messianic awakening”) [13] reached the streets and cottages of Nazareth, and either in His workshop there or at a project in nearby Sepphoris, Jesus heard the news. He knew that His time had come, and He left his tools and walked from Nazareth to the Jordan River to be baptized “to begin a ministry in which He would proclaim a kingdom mightier than the Roman and tell of a world saved not by man who became God (like Augustus or Tiberius) but by God who became man.” [14]

The Arrival of Jesus at the Jordan River, verse 13

Then Jesus arrived from Galilee at the Jordan coming to John, to be baptized by him.

Matthew’s account of Jesus’ baptism begins with His arrival at the Jordan. This is His first appearance as an adult in the Gospel. Until this paragraph Matthew has only been concerned with Jesus’ childhood. [15]

Matthew mentions Jesus’ starting point (Galilee) and His destination (Jordan River) but says nothing of the journey in between. [16] “Then,” says Matthew, “Jesus arrived.” The word then links this event to what has preceded. Jesus arrives when John is preaching to the crowds and baptizing (cf. Luke 3:21). [17] The verb arrived (παραγίνεται, paraginetai) used to introduce the adult Jesus is the same one that introduced John. And it is what grammarians call the historical or dramatic present, i.e., Matthew wants to put us in the midst of the scene as the event takes place: “Then, Jesus makes His appearance.” [18] The purpose in His coming is stated succinctly, i.e., He comes “to be baptized” by John. He comes to be immersed in water with the other Israelites as they confess their sins.

The Dialogue of Jesus with John the Baptist, verses 14-15

But John tried to prevent Him, saying, “I have need to be baptized by You, and do You come to me?” But Jesus answering said to him, “Permit it at this time; for in this way it is fitting for us to fulfill all righteousness.” Then he permitted Him.

The Reluctance of John, verse 14

We should not think that Jesus needed to repent, confess His sins, or be forgiven. Certainly John did not think so. [19] The later New Testament writers emphatically state that He “knew no sin” (2 Cor. 5:21), “committed no sin” (1 Pet. 2:22) — in fact, there was no sin in Him at all (1 John 3:5; cf. Heb. 4:15; 7:26; 1 Pet. 1:19; 3:18). Therefore when John saw Jesus standing in the water before him to be baptized he “tried to deter Him” (NIV). [20] He was surprised to see Him there. It didn’t seem right.

This in itself is remarkable testimony to the character of Jesus. The two men were cousins. We do not know how much time they spent together as children, but certainly John had heard the stories of his own remarkable birth and the even more marvelous birth of Jesus. And he must have heard stories about Jesus’ knowledge of Scripture, which was prodigious even as a child. “I have need to be baptized by You, and do You come to me?” John was, no doubt, a humble man — conscious of his own sin. Yet he knew of no sin that Jesus needed to confess or of which He needed to repent. [21]

The Reply of Jesus, verse 15

Verse 15 contains the first words of Jesus recorded by Matthew. “Permit it at this time” ( ̓́Αφες ἄρτι, aphes arti). The expression “at this time” (ἄρτι) may imply “for the moment at least.” [22] Things will be different in the future when it is recognized that Jesus’ role is superior to that of John. Jesus said that “it is fitting” (γὰρ πρέπον ἐστίν, gar prepon estin) for Him to be baptized by John, i.e., it is right or proper. [23] Jesus must be baptized because the Messiah must “fulfill all righteousness” (πληρῶσαι πᾶσαν δικαιοσύνην, plērōsai pasan dikaiosynēn).

One of the questions traditionally asked about this passage is, “Why did Jesus need to be baptized?” John’s baptism concerned repentance and the forgiveness of sins. Why did one who did not need to repent or confess His sins come for baptism? [24] The answer that Jesus gave John provides the clue. He had to be baptized “to fulfill all righteousness.” There have been several explanations of this phrase, two of which merit discussion. [25]

First, Jesus, as Israel’s Messiah, had to fulfill all the righteous requirements of the Law. In Matthew the term righteousness (δικαιοσύνη, dikaiosynē) means “conformity to God’s will.” Matthew’s phrase calls to mind the words in Paul (Gal. 4:4), “born of a woman, born under the Law.” Whatever the Law required, He would do. He was circumcised even though there was no need to put away the body of the flesh in His case (cf. Col. 1:11). As a child He was presented in the temple, although He does not need redemption from the house of bondage (cf. Luke 2:22). John was a prophet who received direct revelation from God. His command to be baptized was, therefore, “Law,” and Messiah had to fulfill all of the Law. [26] John’s baptism “signified not only the removal of sins; it also pointed to a positive preparation and dedication of heart to the coming King and His kingdom. He, too, belongs to this people, although He is their King, and must demonstrate His willingness to do the will of God.” Jesus’ baptism, then, is a phase of His humiliation under the Law. [27]

A second interpretation [28] of the phrase draws attention to the verb fulfill (πληρόω, plēroō) which occurs sixteen times in Matthew, thirteen times in quotations or allusions to the Old Testament. [29] This would suggest that Jesus is here speaking about the fulfillment of prophecy. This is significant because in verse 17 there are allusions to two Old Testament texts (Ps. 2:7 and Isa. 42:1). Those following this interpretation point to Jesus’ great knowledge of Scripture. He knew and reflected upon the messianic prophecies of the Old Testament. [30]

Those prophecies said that He was to be anointed Messiah and Servant of the Lord, and so He obediently came to fulfill them. This “fulfills all righteousness” because prophecy declares God’s will, [31] and to fulfill prophecy is to fulfill righteousness. [32] My own view is that a synthetic approach incorporating both of these ideas is best.

In any case, John permitted Jesus to be baptized. With Jesus’ first words in Matthew’s Gospel, the opposition of John is overcome. [33] Jesus was then immersed in the waters of the Jordan. Mark (1:9) says, “Jesus…was baptized by John in the Jordan.”

There is one additional observation on verse 15 that needs to be made. Note again Jesus’ words, “It is fitting for us” (ἡμίν, hēmin). Jesus carefully includes John in His first public act. There is a remarkable humility in Jesus’ coming to John. Others were critical of his message. After all, he rather boldly spoke out on hell, and that is a doctrine that demands sensitive handling. Two of the great worthies of the Scottish Church, Robert Murray M’Cheyne (1813–43) and Andrew Bonar (1810–92) were walking together, and M’Cheyne asked Bonar what he had preached on the past Sunday. Bonar said his text was, “The wicked shall be turned into hell” (Ps. 9:17, AV). M’Cheyne asked, “Were you able to preach it with tenderness?” [34] This was a valid question and one that illustrates the delicacy of the topics that John the Baptist preached on. Many were offended. Yet our Lord was not critical — He was humble: He asked John to baptize Him.

There is another thing. John was an independent. He was a man of the desert, a man who stayed in the wilderness away from the holy city and the temple. The religious establishment resented this outsider. We need to follow our Lord’s example and not be too particular about various Evangelical believers with whom we associate in the work of God. I think of para-church organizations (Young Life, Inter-Varsity, Campus Crusade, World Vision, and the Navigators, etc.) who often keep the established churches honest with their “prophetic” emphasis on evangelism, discipleship, and social concern. Our Lord was not afraid to identify Himself with this maverick of a prophet. [35]

The Reaction of Heaven to the Baptism, verses 16-17

The Descent of the Spirit, verse 16

After being baptized, Jesus came up immediately from the water; and behold, the heavens were opened, and he saw the Spirit of God descending as a dove and lighting on Him, and behold, a voice out of the heavens said, “This is My beloved Son, in whom I am well-pleased.”

After being baptized Jesus immediately climbed up the river bank and out of the water. Then the heavens opened (ἠνεῴχθησαν οἱ οὐρανοί, ēneōchthēsan hoi ouranoi). The opening of the heavens often signals a vision in Scripture (cf. Isa. 64:1; Ezek. 1:1; Acts 7:56; Rev. 4:1; 19:11). The passive form of the verb (ἀνοίγω) is best understood as a “divine passive,” i.e., God is understood to be the one who opened the heavens. [36]

Jesus sees “the Spirit of God descending as a dove, and coming upon Him.” John’s Gospel (1:32) indicates that John the Baptist also saw “the Spirit descending as a dove.” [37] Luke (3:22) says the dove came “in bodily form.” The Evangelists stress a “literal or real descent of the Spirit.” [38] The Jewish rabbis understood the dove to be a symbol of the Holy Spirit. In the Babylonian Talmud the hovering of the Spirit over the face of the waters in Genesis 1:2 is represented as the fluttering of a dove over her young.39 It is a beautiful picture of power in gentleness. [40]

In the present passage, in light of the allusion to Isaiah 42:1 in verse 17, the Spirit comes upon Him to anoint Him for the Messianic office. “I have put my Spirit upon Him,” says Jehovah (Yahweh) God in Isaiah (cf. 42:5). The Lord Jesus made it clear that He viewed His baptism as His anointing when He stood in the synagogue and read Isaiah 61:1, “The Spirit of the Lord is upon Me, because He anointed Me to preach the Gospel to the poor” (Luke 4:18). Closing the book, Jesus said, “Today this Scripture has been fulfilled in your hearing” (Luke 4:21).

The Approval of the Father, verse 17

After the vision of the dove comes “a voice out of the heavens.” God the Father speaks [41] and says, “This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.” It is generally agreed that this sentence contains allusions to Psalm 2 and Isaiah 42. [42] The first line (“This is my…Son”) is from or has been influenced by Psalm 2:7. Psalm 2 says, “You are my son,” and this wording is followed in Mark (1:11) and Luke (3:22). Matthew merely paraphrases, putting it in his own words, changing the “you are” (Σὺ εἴ, su ei) to “this is” (Οὕτός ἐστιν, houtos estin). He may have done this to indicate that others were there who heard the divine testimony. [43] Memorable are God’s words to Samuel about David, “Anoint him, for this is he.” The thought is that Jesus is publicly anointed. “Dear world,” God says, “this is it, here He is!” In a sermon on this text, Luther says that everything promised in the Old Testament points in some way to Jesus’ baptism. [44]

The title, “Son” or “Son of God” is one with a variety of nuances. [45] In some passages the nuance is clear, but in others the various nuances are intertwined and “hard to nail down.” [46] In light of the virginal conception in chapter one, many believe the title here speaks of eternal, ontological or essential sonship, i.e., Christ’s eternal relationship to God the Father. [47] It confirms and emphasizes the fact already expressed in the story of the virginal conception that Jesus is the eternal Son of God who has assumed human flesh. However, the allusions to the Old Testament Messianic text (Psalm 2:7) in verse 17 suggest that in this passage “Son” is a Messianic title48 given to Jesus in time49 and is not a reference to His eternal divine sonship. [50] The allusion to Psalm 2:7 (“this is my Son”), anticipates the time when the Son of David will be “adopted” by God51 and appointed to the Messianic office of “Son of God” (2 Sam. 7:13–14). [52] This installation takes place at the resurrection of our Lord (cf. Rom. 1:4; Heb. 1:4–5). [53]

The next words, “beloved” and “in whom I am well pleased” are derived from Isaiah 42:1. [54] Jesus is God’s “beloved” son. The adjective beloved (ἀγαπητός, agapētos) [55] is used a number of times in the O. T. to translate the Hebrew word “only” (יָהִיד, yāḥîd, e.g., of Isaac in Gen. 22:2, 12). [56] It is a word of emotion and affection. [57] The verb “well pleased” (εὐδοκέω, eudokeō) speaks of God’s delight in His Son. [58] The voice from heaven is the seal of approval upon the so-called “hidden years.” We might want to know more of those years, but the testimony of the Father is enough. He was pleased (aorist εὐδόκησα, eudokēsa). [59]

These two Old Testament passages, Psalm 2 and Isaiah 42, combine to form a kind of “coronation formula” for Jesus. The one passage, Psalm 2, is a psalm of the Messianic king. [60] The other, Isaiah 42, is a reference to the Suffering Servant of the Lord. The words inform Him that He is “born to suffer, born a king.” [61] Together they become a “preview of His destiny, a synthesis of ruling and suffering of incomparable value.” [62]

The fact that the whole Trinity is involved in this scene clearly points to the transcendent importance of this event in our Lord’s life and ministry! [63]

The Significance of the Baptism of Christ

The Doctrinal Significance of the Baptism

Christ’s Baptism Marks the Formal Beginning of His Ministry

After Jesus’ ascension in Acts 1:22 Peter spoke of the baptism of the Lord Jesus as the beginning of His ministry. The Gospels all join in commencing His ministry shortly after this meeting with John the Baptist. It was there by the Jordan that He received His call or commission to His messianic work. [64] The baptism, then, marks “the inauguration of the messianic ministry.” [65]

Christ’s Baptism is His Consecration to the Father’s Will. [66]

When word came to Nazareth of the preaching of John, Jesus determined to go to the Jordan. When challenged by the Baptist He took His stand — “I will do my Father’s will.” I will “fulfill all righteousness.” His whole demeanor is one of consecration — dedication to doing God’s will.

[Christ’s Baptism is His Manifestation to Israel, John 1:31].

We digress from Matthew to hear John the Baptist’s testimony in John 1:31. One might think that it was John’s main task to lead individual Jews to repentance. That is not what John the Baptist says. He says that he came to point the nation to Messiah. He says, “I came baptizing in water…in order that He might be manifested to Israel.” John’s main task was to reveal the Messiah to Israel, and that, says Morris, “was no mean task.” [67]

Christ’s Baptism is His Identification with Israel

Messiah is a representative person. He is a mediator who represents God to the people and the people to God. The Servant of the Lord is also the servant of man — guilty, sinful, miserable man. And so He expresses his solidarity with them in the waters of the Jordan. By doing so He condemns the self righteous and wicked for their failure to repent. And by doing so He takes His stand with the publicans, sinners, and respectable members of society who confess their sins and await the coming of the kingdom. [68]

His baptism is not, I repeat, a confession of sin. Rather it is an expression of solidarity with sinners who wanted Messiah and His kingdom to come. “They desired God’s promises, and they wished to be ready for the King. And the Lord’s heart was there at once; the sympathies of His soul were with those that were humbling themselves in the sense of their sin before God.” [69]

Jesus felt so keen a sympathy with His fellowman that He felt this baptism to be appropriate. This did not mean that he shared their guilt. Imagine a man who is convicted of embezzlement and sent to prison. It is useless to tell his wife not to be ashamed, even though she is innocent. It is useless to tell Jesus that He need not be baptized because He has no personal guilt. As our Lord united with man in deepest humiliation and sympathy for their need, it probably flashed into John’s mind that He was Israel’s king. “Why, of course, this is the very spirit of the Messiah.” [70]

Jesus’ solidarity with sinful man led Him, of course, to His death. He chose to “identify Himself unreservedly with the wretched, sin-ridden, guilt-stained race of men for love’s sake.” In the end He took their sin upon Himself; in Paul’s phrase “He made Him who knew no sin to be sin on our behalf” (2 Cor. 5:21). [71]

An incomparable modern illustration is Father Damien (1840–89) who worked in the Sandwich Islands and Hawaii. At his own request he was sent to a settlement of lepers in Molokai. There he ministered single-handedly to the spiritual and physical needs of 600 lepers, dressing their wounds, building them houses, and digging their graves. Even after he caught the disease himself he continued his work until he was helpless. [72]

So with the Lord Jesus. He put Himself in harm’s way to save sinful man. The Servant of the Lord came “to serve, and to give His life a ransom for many” (Mark 10:45).

Christ’s Baptism is His Anointing for the Messianic Office

We have already touched on this earlier, but it is the primary lesson of the passage. The Apostle Peter spoke of “how God anointed Him with the Holy Spirit and with power” (Acts 10:38). This involves two things: First, it is His anointing for His office. But it is also, according to Acts 10:38, His empowerment for His mission. [73] As man, Jesus required the divine enabling for His work on earth. [74] This anointing was for His entire work — for His preaching, His miracles, and His passion. It not only includes the work of redemption, but also the accompanying work of judgment in the future (Matt. 3:11–12). He is God’s anointed prophet, priest, and king — to tell us the truth, to die for our sins, and to rule and judge the world.

Christ’s Baptism Anticipates the Dawning of the Age of the Spirit

The coming of Messiah would bring the age of the Spirit, according to the prophets (Isa. 61:1). And now the Spirit has come upon Jesus. [75] It heralds the dawn of a new age that would begin on the day of Pentecost (Acts 2). [76] Just as the dove hovering over the deep in Genesis 1 is associated with the creation, so the dove upon Jesus heralds a new beginning. [77] The last times have dawned, the baptism of Jesus announces; redemption is about to appear. [78]

Christ’s Baptism Illustrates the Goal of His Ministry

When Jesus was immersed in the waters of the Jordan and then emerged from them, it seems most likely that this was intended to be a figure of death. This is suggested by a number of things: (1) The quotation in verse 17 is taken from the Servant passages of Isaiah which speak of the Servant who would pour Himself out to death [Isa. 53:12]. (2) The descent of the dove is significant in that it was the Old Testament bird of sacrifice [Lev. 1:14]. [79] (3) Most important, in two New Testament texts (Mark 10:38; Luke 12:50) Jesus describes His death as a baptism. Mark 10:38, in particular, may well be Jesus’ own interpretation of baptism; it has to do with death. [80] John’s baptism of Jesus foreshadows His death. Calvary is His baptism, and the Great Commission (Matt. 28:18–20) is a charge to unite men and women with His death. [81]

The Practical Significance of the Baptism

Christ’s Baptism is the Prototype of Christian Baptism

It has been said that “no writer of the New Testament brings the baptism of Jesus into relation with Christian baptism.” [82] There is a very good reason for this. The baptism of Christ was a unique moment in the history of salvation. It was a turning point that cannot be imitated, and the New Testament writers keep their reverent distance knowing that no believer is the Son of God anointed for the work of redemption. [83] Having said that, however, there is good reason to look at the baptism of Jesus as “the model for Christian baptism” [84] or “the prototype of Christian baptism.” [85]

The first and chief argument lies in the words of our Lord Himself. He refers to His death as His “baptism” (βάπτισμα, baptisma; Mark 10:38; Luke 12:50). In light of His use of the term in this way there is every reason to believe that His baptism in Jordan prefigured His death and burial. [86] Furthermore, the Apostle Paul will later (Romans 6) describe Christian baptism as being united to Christ in His death, burial, and resurrection. In short, His baptism prefigured His death and resurrection, and His death and resurrection are the “determinative redemptive acts lying behind Christian baptism.” [87]

Second, the Holy Spirit was given to Jesus at His baptism. The one Christian baptism (Eph. 4:5) of Christian believers is the baptism of the Spirit symbolized by immersion in water. When people believe in Christ they are baptized in the Holy Spirit, i.e., they are spiritually united to Christ in His body the church. That is symbolized by water baptism. [88]

Third, Jesus was anointed as God’s Son at His baptism. As noted above, Messianic Sonship was conferred upon our Lord at His baptism. The parallel with Christian believers is this: we become sons when we believe in Christ, and water baptism is a symbol of the work of Christ that makes this happen.

Christ’s Baptism is the Prototype for Christian Obedience

When Jesus stepped into the Jordan River He was consecrating Himself to the will of God for His life. In this He is our great example for the Christian life (cf. Heb. 12:2–3). We do not follow Him in order to be saved. Rather, the “imitation of Christ” is the calling of those who have already been saved.

Christ’s Baptism Provides a Clue to Christian Living and Service

Peter says that at Jesus’ baptism He was “anointed…with the Holy Spirit and with power” (Acts 10:38). Just before He ascended into heaven the Lord made this promise to the disciples, “you shall receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you” (Acts 1:8). If the Son of God in His manhood needed the empowerment of the Holy Spirit to carry out His work as the Servant of the Lord, is it not clear that we need that empowerment, too? Let us do nothing in our own power or our own understanding. Let us daily ask God our Father for the Spirit’s help.

Conclusion

The only two times that God speaks directly to us in the synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke) He says the same thing, “This is my priceless Son; I am deeply pleased with Him” (Matt. 3:17; 17:5). [89] “If you know this,” God seems to say, “you know the most important fact in the world. In this man is everything I want to say, reveal, and do, and everything I want people to hear, see, and believe.” Can we imagine the kindness and love that Jesus sensed when He heard those words? Jesus faced many terrible things as He ministered among men, but He faced them in the wonderful confidence that God loved Him.

This raises a question with practical significance for the Christian life. Can we know such love? Can I get up and face each day knowing that God loves me — that He likes me? Yes I can! Surprising as it may seem, the Bible teaches that we can become members of God’s family. The Bible describes this as adoption by grace (Rom. 8:15–17). Jesus’ anointing by the Spirit was His ordination to the work of redemption. Our baptism by the Spirit, which takes place the moment we believe in Christ, insures that we are members of God’s family. The Holy Spirit’s work is to assure us that God is our loving Father. Baptism is an outward symbol of this inward reality. It is God’s way of saying, “You are my priceless child; I am deeply pleased with you.” You can face the rest of today with the joy of God’s love in your heart (cf. Rom. 5:5). Believe the gospel, the good news: “Christ died for our sins…He was buried…He was raised on the third day” (1 Cor. 15:1–8). If you take God at His word that this is true, you will be saved; you will be a child of God, and the Holy Spirit will tell you it is true.

Notes

1. This is the fourth in a series of occasional articles on the Life of Christ.
2. David MacLeod is a member of the faculty of Emmaus Bible College and the Associate Editor of The Emmaus Journal.
3. In Exodus 30:22–33 Moses is instructed to mix anointing oil, using as ingredients myrrh, cinnamon, aromatic cane, cassia, and olive oil. Psalm 89:20 seems to suggest that this same kind of oil was used on David. Cf. B. C. Birch, “Oil, Anointing,” ISBE 3 (1986), 586.
4. Cf. D. H. Engelhard, “Anoint; Anointing,” ISBE 1 (1979), 129.
5. Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History 1.3.7–8, LCL, 2 vols., trans. Kirsopp Lake and J. E. L. Oulton (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1926–32), 1:30–33.
6. G. R. Beasley-Murray, Baptism in the New Testament (1962; reprint ed., Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1973), 55.
7. Luther said that in His baptism, Jesus “becomes another man, not in His person but in His office.” Quoted by Frederick Dale Bruner, Matthew, A Commentary, 2 vols., vol. 1: the Christbook (Waco: Word, 1987), 87.
8. Marcus Dods, “Baptism,” DCG (H), 1:170.
9. Enslin argued that, while John and Jesus both existed, their paths never crossed (Morton S. Enslin, “John and Jesus,” ZNW 66 [1975], 1–18). This is a viewpoint held by very few scholars. Even the most radical of critics accept the historicity of Jesus’ baptism, but, as would be expected, they find legendary elements in it. Cf. Rudolf Bultmann, The History of the Synoptic Tradition, trans. John Marsh (New York: Harper & Row, 1963), 247–53; John Dominic Crossan, The Historical Jesus: The Life of a Mediterranean Jewish Peasant (San Francisco: Harper, 1991), 232–34; R. W. Funk, ed., The Acts of Jesus: The Search for the Authentic Deeds of Jesus (San Francisco: HarperCollins, 1998), 54. Bultmann believed the account to have later legendary elements, since it sets forth the baptism as a messianic consecration, and the earliest traditions of the life of Jesus are unmessianic, according to the form critics. The present writer rejects Bultmann’s basic assumption, viz., that the earliest traditions of Jesus do not present Him as Messiah, and I therefore find his argument without force (cf. Beasley-Murray, Baptism in the New Testament, 62). Two helpful criteria have been set forth by scholars in support of the historicity of the account: (1) The criterion of multiple attestation. The baptism is recorded in all three Synoptic Gospels [Matt. 3:13–17; Mark 1:9–11; Luke 3:21–22] and is spoken of by John the Baptist in the Gospel of John [John 1:29–34]. In non-canonical literature Jesus’ baptism is referred to in the apocryphal Gospel According to the Hebrews, §6, which is not directly dependent upon the canonical Gospels. Incidentally, a reference to the baptism in the apocryphal Gospel According to the Ebionites, §5, is generally viewed as dependent upon the Synoptic Gospels and is therefore not cited as an independent source. The Gospel According to the Hebrews originated in Egypt and was written in Greek at the beginning of the second century. The Gospel According to the Ebionites was written in the first half of the second century in Greek. Crossan (234) adds the apostolic father, Ignatius, as another independent witness to the baptism [To the Ephesians 18:2, but not To the Smyrnaeans 1:1]. For the texts cited, cf. J. K. Elliott, ed., The Apocryphal New Testament [rev. ed., Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1999], 10, 15, and Kirsopp Lake, trans. The Apostolic Fathers, 2 vols., LCL [Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1912], 1:192–93, 252–53. (2) The criterion of embarrassment. It is totally unlikely for two reasons that the early church would have invented a story like the baptism of Jesus. First, it could easily be misinterpreted to suggest that Jesus was inferior to John the Baptist. Second, the early Christian writers of the New Testament considered Jesus sinless and the source of forgiveness of sins. It is thus improbable that they would invent a narrative in which He associated Himself with sinners and underwent with them what Mark (1:4) describes as a “baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins.” The most recent discussions of the historicity of the baptism of Jesus are found in: John P. Meier, A Marginal Jew: Rethinking the Historical Jesus, 2 vols., vol. 2: Mentor, Message, and Miracles [New York: Doubleday, 1994], 100–105; Robert L. Webb, “Jesus’ Baptism: Its Historicity and Implications,” BBR 10 [2000], 261–309. Both Meier and Webb assume a two-source hypothesis for the Synoptic Gospels. Meier’s work is quite marred by his skepticism. Evangelical scholars would add a third criterion, a theological one, namely, the divine inspiration of the text of Scripture..
10. Many older writers dated the birth of Christ somewhere between 6 bc and 4 bc. Finegan, the acknowledged expert in the field today, dates the birth of Christ in December, 3 bc, or January, 2 bc, with the latter date being more likely. He dates the death of Herod in 1 bc. Cf. Jack Finegan, Handbook of Biblical Chronology (rev. ed., Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1998), 300–301, 366.
11. Finegan (Handbook of Biblical Chronology, 345, 366) concluded that Christ’s baptism took place sometime in the autumn of ad 29. Assuming a 2 bc birth for Jesus, He would have been thirty years of age at His baptism (Luke 3:23). There is, of course, no “Year Zero.” The year following 1 bc is 1 ad.
12. A. Oepke, “βάπτω,” TDNT, 1 (1964), 537.
13. Oepke, “βάπτω,” 536.
14. Archibald M. Hunter, Introducing New Testament Theology (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1957), 10; cf. S. Lewis Johnson, Jr., “The Baptism of Jesus,” BS 123 (1966): 224-25.
15. Bruner, The Christbook, 83.
16. Cf. Leon Morris, The Gospel According to Matthew (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1992), 63.
17. D. A. Carson, “Matthew,” in The Expositor’s Bible Commentary, 12 vols., ed. Frank E. Gaebelein (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1984), 8:106. Carson notes that τότε has different nuances in Matthew.
18. Daniel B. Wallace, Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1996), 526. Cf. Bruner, The Christbook, 83.
19. The commentary of Davies and Allison, so full of many good things, is terribly marred by a “hermeneutic of suspicion.” John’s implied assumption of Jesus’ sinlessness cannot be historical, they argue, because it presupposes a developed Christology and is inconsistent with the doubt of John in Matthew 11:2–6. Carson’s hermeneutic of goodwill makes perfectly good sense of the verse. Furthermore, John’s doubt in Matthew 11 is easily understood as an earlier faith now weakening (Beasley-Murray, Baptism in the New Testament, 57). Cf. W. D. Davies and Dale C. Allison, The Gospel According to Saint Matthew, ICC, 3 vols. (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1988), 1:323.
20. Διεκώλυεν (imperfect of διακωλύω) is a conative imperfect, i.e., an imperfect of attempted action. Cf. Wallace, Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics, 550.
21. Carson, “Matthew,” 107. M’Neile and others reject this interpretation and argue that John meant not that he needed Jesus to baptize him in water but in the Holy Spirit and fire (cf. v. 11). As Carson observes, this causes unnecessary conflict with John 1:31–34 which says that John did not realize Jesus was the Messiah (the baptizer in Spirit and fire) until after His baptism when the Spirit descended upon Him. Cf. Alan Hugh M’Neile, The Gospel According to St. Matthew (London: Macmillan, 1915), 30; Beasley-Murray, Baptism in the New Testament, 57; Johnson, “The Baptism of Christ,” 225; Robert H. Gundry, Matthew: A Commentary on His Handbook For a Mixed Church Under Persecution (2d ed., Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1994), 51.
22. Davies and Allison, The Gospel According to Saint Matthew, 1:324.
23. BDAG, s.v. “πρέπω,” 861.
24. Cf. Oscar Cullmann, Baptism in the New Testament, trans. J. K. S. Reid (London: SCM, 1950; reprint ed., Philadelphia: Westminster, n.d.), 16. That some in the early church were embarrassed by the baptism of Jesus is indicated in the apocryphal Gospel of the Nazaraeans, §13, written in Aramaic in the first half of the second century: “Behold, the mother of the Lord and his brothers said to him, ‘John the Baptist baptizes for the remission of sins; let us go and be baptized of him.’ But he said, ‘What have I committed, that I should be baptized of him, unless it be that in saying this I am in ignorance’” (cf. Elliott, The Apocryphal New Testament, 13). Modern scholars, as well, read their own skepticism and misunderstanding back into the New Testament texts. The Evangelists (Matthew, Mark, and Luke) were “uneasy with the idea of John baptizing Jesus because that seems to make John superior and Jesus sinful” (Crossan, The Historical Jesus, 232). They therefore engaged in “theological damage control” by inventing certain “safety devices” to protect Jesus’ superiority to John as well as Jesus’ sinlessness. Examples of these “safety devices” are: (1) The theophany of the Holy Spirit and the voice of God the Father are devices employed to show that Jesus is the Son of God and not a sinner and to prove He is superior to John. (2) John’s foretelling Jesus’ baptism with the Holy Spirit [Matt. 3:11], as well as his attempt to dissuade Jesus from being baptized and Jesus’ insistence that it be permitted are all invented devices to protect the sinlessness of Jesus. (3) Luke’s proleptic narration of John’s imprisonment before his description of the baptism of Jesus is a “clever ploy” designed to stress Jesus’ superiority to John (Meier, A Marginal Jew, 2:102). Such analyses reveal more about the attitude of many in the academic world than they do about the divinely inspired text of the New Testament. The great Evangelical statesman, Sir Robert Anderson, once addressed some comments to churchmen that might just as easily be applied to those of us engaged in the academic study of Scripture, “The Bible is more than a book—it is a revelation; and thus regarded it is above the [academy of scholars]. We do not judge the Bible by the [academy]; we judge the [academy] and its teaching by the Bible…. The Bible was written for honest hearts. It is addressed, moreover, to spiritual men. And what is the practical test of spirituality? ‘If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things which I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord’ (1 Cor. 14:37); these word betoken, not the insolence of a [scholar], but the authority of an inspired apostle” (The Silence of God [9th ed., London: Pickering & Inglis, n.d.], 93, 95).
25. Davies and Allison (The Gospel According to Saint Matthew, 1:321–23, 325–27) offer eight different explanations to the question, “Why was Jesus baptized?” and seven different explanations of the phrase “to fulfill all righteousness.” Among the answers to the question, “Why was Jesus baptized?” they offer the assertion of Strauss that Jesus came to John in order to repent and find forgiveness (D. F. Strauss, The Life of Jesus Critically Examined [2d. ed., New York and London, 1892], 237–39). This sets aside the biblical doctrine of Jesus’ sinlessness. Bruner writes, “Jesus’ answer does not reveal a sense of sin” (The Christbook, 84).
26. Hagner ignores John’s authority as an O. T. prophet when he says it is difficult to understand submission to John’s baptism as submission to God’s command. Cf. Donald A. Hagner, Matthew 1–13, WBC (Dallas: Word, 1993), 56.
27. Johnson, “The Baptism of Christ,” 227; cf. G. C. Berkouwer, The Person of Christ (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1955), 246.
28. A third interpretation deserves mention because of its widespread acceptance today. The voice from heavens tells Jesus in effect that His baptism typifies His death on the Cross. He is the Servant of Isaiah 53:11 by whose death many will be made righteous. Jesus is baptized in view of His death, which effects the forgiveness of sins. Cf. Cullmann, Baptism in the New Testament, 16–22; idem., The Christology of the New Testament, trans. S. C. Guthrie and C. A. M. Hall (rev. ed., Philadelphia: Westminster, 1963), 67–69. The view is to be rejected for two reasons: (1) Cullmann has read Paul’s use of “righteousness” back into Matthew, who never uses the term in a Pauline fashion but instead always means “conformity to God’s will.” (2) Jesus includes John in the fulfillment of all righteousness (“it is fitting for us”) which renders unlikely a theory that ties the righteousness to Jesus’ death. As Carson notes, the “us” is not a “royal us.” Cf. Carson, “Matthew,” 107; Davies and Allison, The Gospel According to Saint Matthew, 1:325–26.
29. The other three passages are 13:48 (of a net being filled up), 23:32 (of the ironic fulfillment of prophecy), and here in 3:15. The thirteen uses in formula quotations or in verses where prophecy or the prophets are the subject are: 1:22; 2:15, 17, 23; 4:14; 5:17; 8:17; 12:17; 13:35; 21:4; 26:54, 56; 27:9. Cf. Davies and Allison, The Gospel According to Saint Matthew, 1:326.
30. One of the presuppositions of form critical Leben-Jesu-Forschung (i.e., “Life of Jesus research”) is the assumption that Jesus was not conscious of being the Messiah and did not represent Himself as such to the disciples. Furthermore, His disciples did not attribute that office to Him until after the “Easter event” (cf. Rudolf Bultmann, Theology of the New Testament, 2 vols., trans. K. Grobel (New York: Scribner’s, 1955), 1:26–32; Günther Bornkamm, Jesus of Nazareth, trans. Irene and Fraser McLuskey and James M. Robinson (London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1960), 172. Some of the older liberal writers asserted that Jesus developed a Messianic consciousness sometime in His public ministry, possibly at Caesarea Philippi (cf. G. Vos, The Self-Disclosure of Jesus (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1953), 88). Evangelical scholarship has rejected these conclusions. It finds the roots of Jesus’ self-understanding in the Old Testament and not in the church’s creation of the Gospel story out of the myths and legends of the pagan world. Further, it accepts the doctrine of the incarnation, i.e., the teaching of Scripture that the Son of God has truly assumed human flesh. It also accepts the divine inspiration and trustworthiness of the New Testament and its portrayal of Jesus’ self-consciousness. He was conscious of His unique relationship to God in the earliest account of His boyhood (Luke 2:49). He was conscious of His messianic calling at His baptism as is evidenced by His commitment to “fulfill all righteousness,” i.e., the messianic prophecies of the O. T. During His public ministry He was conscious that He was the divine Son of God (Matt. 11:27; John 10:30), the messianic Son of Man (Mark 14:62), the Suffering Servant of Isaiah (Mark 10:45), the bearer of the Spirit (Luke 4:18–21), and the binder of Satan (Matt. 12:29).
31. “Here ‘righteousness’ seems to mean the saving activity of God.… ‘To fulfill all righteousness’ seems to refer to prophetic fulfillment.” Cf. John P. Meier, Matthew, NTM (Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 1990), 27.
32. Davies and Allison, The Gospel According to Saint Matthew, 1:326–27; Carson, “Matthew,” 108.
33. Johnson, The Baptism of Christ, 225, quoting Theodor Zahn.
34. James S. Stewart, The Life and Teaching of Jesus Christ (New York: Abingdon, n.d.), 36.
35. Cf. Bruner, The Christbook, 85–86.
36. Cf. Wallace, Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics, 437–38.
37. In Matthew 3:16 the phrase ὡσεὶ περιστεράν (“as a dove”) could be taken as adverbial and translated, “as a dove might.” The fact that Jesus saw the Spirit suggests something more concrete, so an adjectival reading is preferable, i.e., “as a dove” (Davies and Allison, The Gospel According to Saint Matthew, 1:333). In Luke 3:22 ὡς περιστεράν is adjectival, and this is emphasized by σωματικῷ εἴδει (“in bodily form”). Cf. Hagner, Matthew 1–13, 58.
38. Hagner, Matthew 1–13, 58.
39. Ḥagigah 15a, in The Babylonian Talmud, 18 vols., vol. 5: Seder Moʿed, vol. 4, trans. I. Epstein (London: Soncino, 1938), 5:92. Genesis 1:2 does not, of course, specifically mention a dove.
40. Davies and Allison (The Gospel According to Saint Matthew, 1:331–34) cite sixteen different explanations of the significance of the dove in Matthew 3:16.
41. After the exile, when the rabbis regarded true prophecy as dead, they developed the concept of בַּת־קוֹל (baṭ qôl), lit. “daughter of a voice,” i.e., the distant echo of God’s voice. They used this expression to describe an inferior substitute for God’s Spirit that was not binding. In New Testament times a voice from heaven was regarded as בַּת־קוֹל. Hill says that Matt. 1:17 is an example of בַּת־קוֹל, but this is incorrect. Matthew 1:17 is direct revelation from God (David Hill, The Gospel of Matthew, NCB [Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1972], 97). Cf. Hagner, Matthew 1–13, 58; Davies and Allison, The Gospel According to Saint Matthew, 1:335–36.
42. This has sometimes been contested, but cf. the discussions in Robert Horton Gundry, The Use of the Old Testament in St. Matthew’s Gospel (Leiden: Brill, 1967), 28–32; Davies and Allison, The Gospel According to Saint Matthew, 1:336–39.
43. Matthew, says Carson (“Matthew,” 109, 110, n.) gives the ipsissima vox (“[Jesus’] own voice,” i.e., Jesus’ teaching in the evangelist’s words) and not the ipsissima verba (“[Jesus’] own words,” i.e., Jesus’ actual words).
44. Bruner, The Christbook, 87.
45. In the New Testament the title “Son” or “Son of God” has “a highly complex, multivalent set of associations.” Cf. C. F. D. Moule, The Origin of Christology (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1977), 31. As Kelly and Vos both noted, the title “Son of God” is used in at least three ways in the New Testament: (1) Of Christ’s Essential or Eternal Sonship. In several passages, notably the great sending passages, the expression “Son” speaks of the nature He shares with His Father [John 3:16; 1 John 4:9; Rom. 8:3; Gal. 4:4]. He has been the Son of God in His essential deity from eternity past. He was sent into this world to redeem mankind. “If the Spirit was the Spirit before God sent Him, the Son was presumably the Son before God sent Him” [F. F. Bruce, The Epistle to the Galatians: A Commentary on the Greek Text, NIGTC (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1982)195]. (2) Of Christ’s Nativity or Incarnational Sonship. Luke attributes the origin of Jesus’ human nature to the direct fatherhood of God [Luke 1:35; 3:38]. (3) Of Christ’s Official or Messianic Sonship. A number of texts describe Him as the descendent of David who is appointed as Messiah and adopted as God’s Son. Here the title describes not our Lord’s divine nature but His function or office as Messiah [Rom. 1:4; Heb. 1:5; cf. 2 Sam. 7:14]. Cf. Geerhardus Vos, The Self-Disclosure of Jesus, ed. J. G. Vos (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1954), 141–42; 191–93; William Kelly, An Exposition of the Gospel of Mark (London: Hammon, 1934), 184; idem., An Exposition of the Gospel of Luke, ed. E. E. Whitfield (London: Alfred Holness, 1914), 26–27.
46. Carson, “Matthew,” 109.
47. This is especially true of older commentators, e.g., William Hendriksen, The Gospel of Matthew, NTC (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1973), 215.
48. Morris, The Gospel According to Matthew, 67.
49. Vos disagrees with the view adopted here. He writes, “”He did not become the Son through receiving the Spirit; on the contrary, He was baptized with the Spirit because He was already the Son.” Vos did recognize that the word “Son” is used in some passages as a Messianic title. He argued, however, that this is not one of those passages. Cf. Geerhardus Vos, The Self-Disclosure of Jesus, 202.
50. Ontological or Eternal Sonship relates to our Lord’s deity, while Messianic Sonship relates to His humanity. As Dods long ago observed, “The Messianic Sonship…rests upon the Eternal Sonship.” We might add that the Incarnational Sonship rests upon the Eternal Sonship as well. Cf. Marcus Dods, “The Epistle to the Hebrews,” in The Expositor’s Greek Testament, 5 vols. (London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1910; reprint ed., Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1970), 4:253.
51. The term “adoption” was incorrectly used by the Adoptionists of the 2d and 8th centuries. They taught that Jesus was only a man who became God by adoption. Evangelical Christians rightly reject this ancient heresy. The New Testament teaches that Christ is the eternal Son of God. Yet He is, in His human nature, the Messianic Son. God the Son took a human nature and in that human state as David’s son, in fulfillment of the Davidic covenant (2 Sam. 7:12–14; Ps. 89:26–28), was “adopted” as God’s Son. Jesus is not only the eternal Son; He is also the Messianic Son. Cf. Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, s.v., “Adoptionism,” by H. F. Vos, 13–14; Zane C. Hodges, “Hebrews,” in The Bible Knowledge Commentary: New Testament, eds., J. F. Walvoord and R. B. Zuck (Wheaton: Victor, 1983), 781.
52. In 2 Samuel 7:14 David is promised that his son, ultimately Messiah, would be adopted as God’s Son. “One is thus to view the statement [“This is my beloved Son”] along the lines of the expectation of the Davidic Son of God of Psalm 2:7.” Cf. W. Schneemelcher, “υἱός,” TDNT, 8 (1972), 368.
53. The reference could be to Messianic Sonship for two reasons: (1) The allusion to Psalm 2, and (2) the fact that the baptism of Jesus is His anointing to the Messianic office. Jesus does not, of course, assume the Messianic office of “Son of God” until His resurrection (Rom. 1:4; Heb. 1:4–5). His baptism is His anointing for office; His resurrection marks His installation into the office.
54. Davies and Allison (The Gospel According to Saint Matthew, 1:338) account for the differences between Matthew 3:17 and Isaiah 42:1 (LXX) by postulating that Matthew used a non-LXX version of Isaiah. It should be noted that Matthew has a fuller quotation from Isaiah 42 (vv. 1–3) in chapter 12 (vv. 18–20).
55. Allen argues that “Beloved” is not an attribute, but an independent title. Cf. Willoughby C. Allen, The Gospel According to St. Matthew, ICC (3d ed., Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1912), 29.
56. Davies and Allison, The Gospel According to Saint Matthew, 1:340.
57. It may be a word of election as well as affection in light of the next line (ἐν ᾧ εὐδόκησα, lit., “with Him I was well pleased”). Cf. Carson, “Matthew,” 109.
58. Cf. BDAG, s.v. “εὐδοκέω,” 404: “be well pleased,” “take delight.” Carson (“Matthew,” 109) takes the aorist tense to refer to Christ’s pretemporal election.
59. Johnson, “The Baptism of Christ,” 226–27.
60. There is some debate over whether Psalm 2 was considered messianic in the first century. Gundry (Matthew, 53) and others say it was. Carson (“Matthew,” 109) and others say it was not. Davies and Allison say it is uncertain (The Gospel According to Saint Matthew, 1:339). It is clearly viewed as messianic by the inspired writers of the NT.
61. Hunter, Introducing New Testament Theology, 15.
62. Johnson, “The Baptism of Christ,” 226. Bruce wrote, “If the proclamation ‘This is My Son’ marks Jesus out as the Messiah addressed in the oracle of Psalm 2:7, ‘Thou art My Son’, the following words, ‘My Beloved, on whom My favor rests’ (v. 17, NEB), equally mark Him out as the obedient Servant of the Lord. The King is anointed, but the circumstances of His anointing show that His royal power and empire must be won by following the Servant’s path of teaching and healing, humility and self-sacrifice (cf. Matt. 8:17; 12:18–21; 20:28).” Cf. F. F. Bruce, Understanding the New Testament: Matthew (London: Scripture Union, 1970), 13.
63. Johnson, “The Baptism of Christ,” 226.
64. Davies and Allison, The Gospel According to Saint Matthew, 1:342.
65. Beasley-Murray, Baptism in the New Testament, 64.
66. Cf. Beasley-Murray, Baptism in the New Testament, 60.
67. Cf. Leon Morris, The Gospel According to John, NICNT (rev. ed., Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1995), 132.
68. Beasley-Murray, Baptism in the New Testament, 57–60.
69. William Kelly, Lectures on the Gospel of Matthew (2d ed., London: Morrish, 1896; reprint ed., Sunbury, PA: Believers Bookshelf, 1971), 68.
70. Dods, “Baptism,” 1:170.
71. Donald Ross, “The Baptism of Jesus,” EvQ 18 (1946): 242-43.
72. Ross, “The Baptism of Jesus,” 244. Cf. ODCC, s.v. “Damien, Father,” 374.
73. Cf. Howard M. Ervin, Conversion-Initiation and the Baptism in the Holy Spirit (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1984), 5–14.
74. It is often asserted, in face of the evidence, that Jesus was filled, empowered, and enabled by the Spirit all through His life, beginning with His conception in Mary’s womb (cf. Bruner, The Christbook, 90–91; Davies and Allison, The Gospel According to Saint Matthew, 1:334–35). Surely the impression left by His baptism is that this work of the Spirit did not begin in His life until His experience at the Jordan.
75. Hagner, Matthew 1–13, 57. It goes too far to say that Jesus’ anointing is His “own entry into the new age and covenant” (Dunn, Baptism in the Holy Spirit, 41). Dunn’s statement is incorrect for two reasons: (1) The immediate context does not interpret the coming of the Spirit as Jesus’ entry into the new age and covenant. (2) In Jesus’ own interpretation of the event He explains it as His ordination into His prophetic ministry (Luke 4:16–21). The most we can say is that Jesus’ baptism anticipates the age of the Spirit. Cf. Ervin, Conversion-Baptism and the Baptism in the Holy Spirit, 18.
76. It must be noted that the new covenant did not begin with the descent of the Spirit at Jordan but at the Cross. Cf. Ervin, Conversion-Initiation and the Baptism in the Holy Spirit, 19.
77. Davies and Allison, The Gospel According to Saint Matthew, 1:334.
78. Beasley-Murray, Baptism in the New Testament, 61. As Dunn notes, however, the messianic age has only begun “in a restricted sense.” Cf. James D. G. Dunn, Baptism in the Holy Spirit, SBT 2d Series, 15 (London: SCM, 1970), 24. Another New Testament writer views the entire inter-advent period as “the last days,” i.e., the last days of the old age (cf. Heb. 1:2). The millennial age will be the “Messianic Age” in the fullest sense.
79. F. W. Grant, The Numerical Bible, 7 vols., vol. 5: The Gospels (New York: Loizeaux, 1897), 59.
80. “‘To be baptized’ means the same as ‘to die.’” Cf. Cullmann, The Christology of the New Testament, 67.
81. Johnson, “The Baptism of Christ,” 228. As Johnson notes, Paul treats the subject theologically in Romans 6:1–14.
82. Beasley-Murray, Baptism in the New Testament, 61; cf. also Meier, A Marginal Jew, 2:105.
83. R. E. O. White, The Biblical Doctrine of Initiation (London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1960), 91. Cf. Beasley-Murray, Baptism in the New Testament, 63.
84. Gundry, Matthew, 41.
85. Francis Wright Beare, The Gospel According to Matthew (San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1981), 99.
86. Pace Beasley-Murray, Baptism in the New Testament, 63.
87. Pace Beasley-Murray, Baptism in the New Testament, 63.
88. Contemporary Pentecostal/Charismatic theology finds in Jesus’ supernatural conception and subsequent anointing by the Holy Spirit at Jordan a theological paradigm for Pentecostal experience. Just as Jesus’ anointing followed His supernatural birth by the Spirit, so the believer’s baptism in the Spirit is subsequent to his/her spiritual birth (cf. Ervin, Conversion-Initiation and the Baptism in the Holy Spirit, 6–7, 17–19). Two observations are in order: (1) The key events in Jesus’ life [conception, baptism, transfiguration, crucifixion, burial, resurrection, and ascension] are once for all events in salvation history. They are not events that happen in the life of every believer. It is true that they do provide for the Apostles a paradigm for Christian experience [e.g., Rom. 6]. Yet we must be careful in how we construct our paradigms, recognizing that what makes sense to us may not be in the end true to the biblical witness. One might just as easily say that just as Jesus received the Spirit at the “beginning” of His ministry [Acts 1:22], so believers receive the Holy Spirit at the “beginning” of their Christian lives, i.e., at the new birth. All paradigms must be judged in the light of Scripture. (2) The overall thrust of New Testament theology is that the baptism of the Spirit is coterminous with the new birth and not subsequent to it. To argue the case for these points goes beyond the intent of this paper. Let me only add that Ervin’s work is an able and irenic response to the work of James Dunn (Baptism in the Holy Spirit, 23–25 and passim). That I do not find it convincing does not detract from my admiration for his theological ability and for the spirit in which he writes.
89. The paraphrase is that of Bruner, The Christbook, 92. I am following him in my conclusion.