Matthew 3:13-15

All of Matthew 3 forms a single logical unit. Everything that happened in  vv1-6 and vv7-12 should form the immediate background in your mind for what is happening here: 

There is a prophet in Israel! John the Baptist has been calling out in the wilderness to prepare the way for the Messiah. He is baptizing people in the wilderness as a sign of repentance. The Pharisees and Sadducees have come, and John has given them an earful.In that context, Jesus comes to be baptized.

Scripture

Then Jesus came from Galilee to the Jordan to John, to be baptized by him. John would have prevented him, saying, "I need to be baptized by you, and do you come to me?" But Jesus answered him, "Let it be so now, for thus it is fitting for us to fulfill all righteousness." Then he consented."
-- Matthew 3:13-15

Observation

Who?

• John the Baptist
• The people of Jerusalem, Judea, and the region around the Jordan
• Pharisees
• Sadducees
• Jesus, the One is to come

What?

• vv13-15: The baptism of Jesus
• v13: Jesus comes to John to be baptized
• v14: John says he should be baptized by Jesus, not the other way around
• v15: Jesus tells John to baptize him in order to "fulfill all righteousness." John consents baptize Jesus.

Where and When?

The location and historical setting is the same as in Matthew 3:1-6 and Matthew 3:7-12. 

Interpretation

When Jesus comes to John the Baptist for baptism, he immediately recognizes Jesus as the One who is to come, and he objects on the grounds that he needs to be baptized by Jesus, not the other way around! John is referring to the baptism "with the Holy Spirit and with fire" about which he had spoken to the Pharisees and Sadducees in v11. His attitude is in direct contrast to that of the Pharisees and Sadducees. Where the religious leaders had wanted to bolster their position in the eyes of the people through a show of repentance, John is willing, even eager, to submit himself to Jesus. Further, John recognizes that Jesus, the sinless Lamb of God had no need for a baptism of repentance--He had no sins of which to repent!

Jesus counters, somewhat mysteriously, that John should "Let it be so now, for thus it is fitting for us to fulfill all righteousness" (v15). 

Let it be so now

By making His justification of being baptized for "now," Jesus is tacitly agreeing with John's statement that he should be baptized by Him and implying that at some later time, John would receive the baptism for which he longed, presumably in heaven since it didn't happen while John the Baptist was alive.

For it is thus fitting for us to fulfill all righteousness

I have to confess that the reason for Jesus to be baptized is as opaque to me as it was to John the Baptist. Since Jesus has no sin, from what can he be repenting?

Digging Deeper

I love inductive Bible study. I love its focus on the text. I love its emphasis on drawing ideas out of the text rather than bringing ideas to the text. I love its humble attitude which allows God's Word to speak for itself. But sometimes, I just get stuck. No matter how much I look at the words and the grammar and the context, I just don't get it. When that happens, I fall back on commentaries, even though it feels like cheating.

Commentaries are a great source for finding out how other Christians have understood a passage through the ages. By seeing how other Christians have made sense of a difficult passage, it is often possible to make sense of it ourselves. However, they are a terrible substitute for reading God's Word and allowing Him to speak to you through it.It is a mistake to allow a commentary (or anything else) to do all your thinking for you.

Choosing a commentary can be difficult. The ones that are cheap or free are often older and use archaic language (which doesn't mean they're bad, but does mean they're harder to read). Commentaries are usually chock-full of the author's theological bias. This can be quite annoying if his bias is different than yours.

I often use the free commentaries available at Blue Letter Bible. Blue Letter Bible has a number of freely available Bible Study tools, including commentaries and tools for doing studies in the original languages.

By looking through several commentaries, I have concluded that this is a difficult passage. not just for me but for everyone. There are several schools of thought about why Jesus was baptized including (but not limited to) these:

• To set an example that we should follow
  
  Jesus set us the example of the perfect life. Even though He had no sin of his own, He demonstrated through His actions what perfect repentance looks like. This included and was culminated in His baptism. People who favor this view often quote 1 Peter 2:21:
  
  For to this you have been called, because Christ also suffered for you, leaving you an example, so that you might follow in his steps.
• To identify with sinful man
  
  Jesus came to identify with us in out sinfulness so that, in that identification, he could ultimately carry our sins with Him to the Cross so that he could make us alive, together with Him (Colossians 2:13-14). People who favor this view often quote 2 Corinthians 5:21:
  
  For our sake he made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God.
  
  Because He had so perfectly identified with our sins, He could legitimately repent of them.
• To symbolically die to his own desires in favor of God the Father's plans
  
  Jesus was a human man. As such He had a human body, a human mind--a human everything, including the normal and good human desire for self-preservation. He had no illusions that the Father's plan for Him would ultimately bring Him to death on the Cross.
  
  Part of the symbolism of baptism is death to one's own desires. As one goes down into the water, one symbolically dies. As one emerges, one is symbolically resurrected to a new life in which the Father's will is preeminent. By being baptized, Jesus is symbolically and publicly laying down his own desires in favor of doing His Father's will. 

Of these, I favor the third. Jesus was certainly the example whom we should follow, but for Him to be baptized merely for the sake of demonstrating that we should be baptized seems to me to make His baptism a contrived event done merely for show. His identification with sinners seems to me like a stronger reason for Him to be baptized, but I think of His identification with humanity being accomplished more in His Incarnation and in the Cross than in his baptism.

Up until this point in His life, Jesus has been a private person. There have been events when his deity has poked out--His birth by the Virgin Mary (Matthew 1), the coming of the Magi (Matthew 2), His trip to the Temple (Luke 2:22-52), but for the most part, He has lived a private life as an everyman in Nazareth of Galilee. In His baptism, Jesus dies to that private life and rises up to His new public life and goes forth to accomplish the task for which God the Father sent Him into the world.

Then he consented

After hearing Jesus' reply, John the Baptist consents to baptize Jesus. Although he may have understood Jesus' reasons, the verse does not say explicitly that John that he did. Rather, we are told that he obeyed Jesus' command.

Application

The recurring themes in these verses are obedience and submission. Both Jesus and John the Baptist display an attitude that says, "Thy will, not mine, be done." In John the Baptist, we see an eagerness and a hunger to submit himself to Christ's lordship. In Jesus, we see a willingness to die to whatever his personal, private life had been in order to fulfill the Father's plan of salvation.

This calls to mind Philippians 2:2-8:

Do nothing from selfish ambition or conceit, but in humility count others more significant than yourselves. Let each of you look not only to his own interests, but also to the interests of others. Have this mind among yourselves, which is yours in Christ Jesus, who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied himself, by taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men. And being found in human form, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross.

This attitude is in direct contrast to the self-aggrandizing attitude of the Pharisees and Sadducees seen in vv7-12.

Reflection

• In what areas is your attitude like that of the Pharisees and Sadducees?
• What things do you do from selfish ambition or vain conceit?
• In what ways do you look to your own interests above the interests of others?
• In what areas of your life is your attitude like that of Jesus and John the Baptist?
• In what ways to you count others as more significant than yourself?
• In what ways do you look to the interests of others above above your own?
• Pray for God to grant you humility and to more fully form the character of Christ in you.

Typology vs. Allegory

In response to my post about the literal interpretation of Scripture, my friend Dani posted this question:

Would you then say that the allegorical approach is invalid? Is it an un-Reformed way of looking at the Bible? Don't we say that "The Old Testament is the New Testament concealed?

I thought this was such an awesome question, that it gets its own post.

There is a distinction between interpreting the Old Testament typologically and interpreting it allegorically. Typology is essentially God's use of symbolism and foreshadowing in the Old Testament to prepare the people of ancient Israel (and us) for the coming of His Son, Jesus.

Living in the world after the Incarnation, we have the benefit of hindsight when looking at the Old Testament, so we can often identify where He has used these devices. For example, when we see the coming of Christ prefigured in the Old Testament, either directly through prophecy or indirectly through the pattern of someone's (e.g., King David's) behavior, that is typology. When we see New Testament symbolism in the physical layout of the Tabernacle/Temple, that is typology.

If one interprets the Scriptures allegorically, one decides that the Scriptures (Old Testament and New Testament) are essentially a giant parable in which one can assign arbitrary symbolic meanings to the text. By making this decision, one leaves the realm where one can derive true meanings from Scripture about who God is, who we are, or how we should behave. For example, if I were to decide "the temple" represents my (purely hypothetical) mistress, and that the "high priest" represents me, the Day of Atonement would take on a very different meaning and application.

All of the Reformers (and St. Augustine and modern evangelicals) have embraced typological interpretation, but have had issues with allegorical interpretations. They have embraced typology for a couple of reasons: first, the New Testament often interprets the Old Testament typologically. If we were to reject typology out of hand, we would have to reject significant portions of the New Testament. Second, typological interpretations grow naturally out of the text.

Correct typological interpretations should

• Flow naturally from the text as written
• Conform to the overall message of Scripture
• Enhance your sense of wonder at God's sovereignty, power, and love

By contrast allegorical interpretations

• Assign arbitrary or contrived values to symbols
• Do not support or are contrary to the overall message of Scripture
• Serve the ends of the person doing the interpreting

All of the "Scriptural" support for practices the to which Reformers objected came out of the allegorical house of cards which Medieval interpreters had build up around the Scriptures.

The difference between typology and allegory is the difference between understanding and misunderstanding the author's intent. Authors use devices like symbolism and foreshadowing to enrich what they write. Correctly understanding the way the author uses these devices enhances our understanding of the text and our experience when reading. When Elwin Ransom recalls upon meeting him again how much he disliked Dick Devine in school, it builds the reader's sense of dread and anticipation. When Devine drugs and kidnaps him the reader experiences the sense of an expectation fulfilled. Similarly, when God promises a King to reign forever on the throne of David, it builds the reader's sense of joyful anticipation for the coming Messiah. When Jesus is born of the line of David, the reader rejoices in God's promise fulfilled (or he should!).

God is the ultimate author of both history (Psalm 139:16) and Scripture (2 Timothy 3:16). In ancient times, He sovereignly arranged the lives of men and nations to prepare the world for the coming of His Son. In the Scriptures of the Old Testament, He uses foreshadowing to tell us about the unfolding of His plan.

Slack Dog

I have been a slack dog about writing on my blog since my vacation. I hereby resolve to do better.