INTO THE WATER (Matthew 3:13-17)
The baptism of Jesus is told by each of the four
Gospel writers, and when all four Gospels agree that
an event about Jesus took place, it likely did.
Further, the story of Jesus being baptized by John the
Baptist raised such awkward theological questions for
the early church that no writer would have invented
it. It is those awkward questions in the story that
probably explains why each Gospel writer handles the
event in a different way.
For Mark the baptism is a personal experience with
Jesus involving no other baptisms and no public
witnesses. There is a a sense of urgency in the
telling: He writes: JUST AS JESUS WAS COMING UP, OUT
OF THE WATER, HE IMMEDIATELY SAW THE HEAVENS TORN
APART. This sense of urgency is absent from the other
three tellings.
Luke's account places Jesus' baptism as the last of
many other baptisms so there are witnesses to Jesus'
baptism and to his affirmation as the Chosen One of
God in the dove and the heavenly voice. Luke also is
at great pain to explain that that John the Baptist
was a complementary and subordinate to Jesus. Oddly,
Luke also has Herod throw the Baptist in prison just
before Jesus' baptism so we have a public baptism but
no baptizer!
John does not mention the baptism as such but only
writes that John the Baptist testified that he saw the
Spirit come down from heaven and rest upon Jesus (John
1:32). John neglects to mention that Jesus may have
been standing in the river Jordan.
And then there is today's account in which Matthew
pictures John and Jesus standing knee deep in the
Jordan where they engage in a fervent debate as to
whom should baptize whom.
Matthew 3:13-17
Then Jesus came from Galilee to John at the
Jordan, 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 it is proper for us in this way to
fulfill all righteousnes."Then he consented. And when
Jesus had heen baptized, just as he came up from the
water, suddenly the heavens were opened to him and he
saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove and
alighting on him. And a voice from heaven said, "This
is my Son, the Beloved, with whom I am well
pleased."
Only Matthew reports this conversation between
Jesus and the Baptist. His version like the other
three is influenced by the early church's desire to
subdue and channel the independent popularity of the
Baptist in support of the Jesus movement. This
conversation between the Baptist and the Nazarene is
the early church's attempt to practice theological
damage control regarding the awkward issues raised by
Jesus' baptism.
How's that? Theological damage control! The fact
that Jesus was baptized by John raised the issue of
why the lesser should baptize the greater. As Jesus
took precedence in authority over John, why did Jesus
feel he needed to be baptized by John the lesser? John
baptized those who repented of their sin. Jesus had
never sinned so he had no need for a baptism unto
repentance in the first place.
All four Gospels agree that the event testified to
the calling of Jesus as the Messiah, the One Chosen by
God (in contrast to John the Baptist and other
candidates for Messiahship who abounded in the first
century). But this primary assertion represented by
the dove and the heavenly voice and by Jesus'
absorption of these signs should not be used to smooth
over the awkward question just noted. Why did Jesus
need to be baptized in the first place?
When you think of it, the divine affirmation: THIS
IS MY SON, THE BELOVED, WITH WHOM I AM WELL PLEASED
could have been delivered at almost any time in Jesus'
ministry. Jesus could have just stood on the bank,
looking on, and the dove and voice visited him. He
would have been dry that way and the awkward question
about why he let John baptize him would not have
arisen.
But as it turned out Jesus did feel compelled to go
into the River and to be baptized by John in order to
confirm his life's work. And fortunately he gives his
own reason for this at verse 15: LET IT BE SO NOW; FOR
IT IS PROPER FOR US IN THIS WAY TO FULFILL ALL
RIGHTEOUSNESS. Jesus' own explanation is not
self-evidently clear: Who are the FOR US? Is this the
regal or royal WE, meaning Jesus alone; or are the FOR
US a reference to Jesus and his heavenly Father. Or is
the FOR US - EVERYBODY, meaning us?
Also the meaning of the phrase FULFILL ALL
RIGHTEOUSNESS is not self-evidently clear in reference
to Jesus who already was deemed to represent the
perfect righteousness of God. So how do you fulfill or
realize that which is already perfectly formed through
the will of God in the incarnation of Jjesus?
I can only surmise that Jesus must have felt it
necessary to go into the river and submit to the work
of the Baptist in order to embody or convey to us his
already perfect righteousness as the Chosen One of God
sent to us. He went into the river that we could
understand what RIGHTEOUSNESS OR RIGHT RELATIONSHIP
WITH GOD means for us. He entered the River in order
to stand with us. He who was without sin was baptized
in the river Jordan to avoid the sin of standing apart
from us.
A popular misinterpretation of the baptism of Jesus
is that it is a clarion call for all others to be
baptized. But Luke states it was afier all the people
had been baptized that Jesus entered the river, and
Mark has no others baptized at the time. And Matthew
focuses entirely on the Jesus and John conversation.
So the baptism of Jesus is not meant mainly as an
inspiration for the baptism of others or for others to
follow Jesus into the river.
If Jesus was the last one to be baptized that day,
he joined us rather than called us to follow him.
Jesus wanted to be in the river where everybody else
already was!Actually, none of the Gospels record that
Jesus ever baptized anyone. His disciples were told to
baptize only at the end; the apostle Paul baptized.
The Church and we today baptize. But Jesus never
baptized.
The essential meaning of this episode must derive
from Jesus' own explanation: it was so that ALL
RIGHTEOUSNESS COULD BE FULFILLED.
The fulfillment of all righteousness, WHICH IS TO
SAY GOD'S RIGHTEOUSNESS required Jesus to enter the
river to be with all people, to be with us.
I suggest the River Jordan can be taken in this
baptism episode to represent the troubled waters of
life in which we all stand, sink or swim. Jesus goes
into our troubled waters because his very
righteousness requires it and our righteousness hinges
on it.
No river, including the Jordan, is necessarily a
place we want to be standing. A river always contains
dangers of the unknown and of strong currents. In
planning for the baptism of Maria Leung in the River
Jordan last October, I was surprised to learn that
there is only one place along the 200 mile flow of the
Jordan where baptisms are sanctioned today. All
baptisms must be conducted at the Jewish kibbutz which
controls both banks of the Jordan where it begins with
the outflow of water from the Sea of Galilee. This is
the one safe place because there only are the banks
smoothed and maintained and because downstream the
river is polluted; and downstream the Jordan flows
through land farmed and contested both by Palestinians
and Israelis.
I suggest that Jesus went into the river not
because the River Jordan was in his opinion some safe
river like the Ganges for ritualistic self-improvement
ablutions, but precisely because the River Jordan is a
metaphor for all humanity who lives in waters not
entirely safe, known and pure. It was into such waters
of our lives that Jesus needed to enter to identify
with us and to make his affirmation from God effective
for us. That is what he meant by the fulfilment of all
righteousness.
Jesus went into the River to be with us so that his
righteousness with God would be available to us where
we are. A righteousness safely proclaimed from the dry
bank lacks the power of a righteousness offered up in
the midst of our existence. Jesus submitted to the
water not for repentance but to fulfil all
righteousness. Matthew means to tell us that Jesus
fulfilled God's righteousness by being Son of God and
Servant of God with us. Jesus submitted to John, the
lesser, as he repeatedly would submit to lesser
authority, because the love of God is most effective
when offered humbly, sincerely, servantlike as with
Jesus in the river.
Jesus' unique relationship with God necessarily
required the humility of a servant who will enter the
River to suffer humiliation and ultimate rejection.
The German theologian Karl Barth put it this way at
the midpoint of our century: JESUS CHRIST IS THE LORD
WHO BECAME SERVANT BY GOING INTO THE FAR COUNTRY (
VIZ.RIVER) AND CONCEALING HIS GLORY. BUT HIS
CONDESCENSION INTO SERVANTHOOD, THE LORD DOES NOT
DISFIGURE HIMSELF. HE REVEALS HIS TRUE NATURE AS ONE
WHO CAME NOT TO RULE BUT TO SERVE.
Jesus went into the RIVER to make the difference he
was sent to earth to make: his divine power and
presence had to be awash in the full range of human
experience. And by entering into the river of our
life, he made things both better and worse for us.
His presence troubles the waters as readily as his
presence smoothes the water. Standing with us in the
River Jesus may bring security but he also may bring
upset. We can see the River Jordan blue and tranquil
at Jesus' baptism. But just below its' surface we can
see the water running red. Blood red. The suffering
and sacrifice of Jesus are anticipated in the river;
they could not be witnessed had Jesus stayed safely on
the bank.
Matthew 3:13-17 is not mainly about Jesus'
relationship with John, nor is it simply an invitation
for our baptism. Jesus went into our River to tell us
that we are so loved by God that God's own Son became
a part of our struggle in the waters, joining us in
the flesh in order to guide us through the turbulent
waters of life and death. Later in his ministry Jesus
was to say: NO GREATER LOVE HAS ANYONE THAN TO GIVE
HIS LIFE FOR ANOTHER. In the River Jordan Jesus began
his work of showing God' s willingness to give his
life to be with us and for us always.
Archives:
Sermon Texts
|