Why did Jesus have to be baptized?

[Nelka]

But if it here be asked, why Jesus Christ, who was innocence itself, yes, and the very essence of sanctity, condescended so far as to be baptized with sinners, we answer, with the Holy Fathers, that it was, 1. to sanction the baptism and ministry of his precursor; 2. not to lose this opportunity of teaching humility, by placing himself among sinners, as if he had stood in need of the baptism of penance for the remission of sins; and lastly, with S. Ambrose, that it was to sanctify the waters, and to give to them the virtue of cleansing men from their sins by the laver of baptism.

 

[EvangAlived]

John 1:
32 John also bore witness thus, I saw the Spirit coming down from heaven like a dove, and resting upon him.

33 Till then, I did not know him ; but then I remembered what I had been told by the God who sent me to baptize with water. He told me, The man who will baptize with the Holy Spirit is the man on whom thou wilt see the Spirit come down and rest.

I do desire people to read more closely. “in”. I did not say John recognized “him”. I said “in him”.

 

[otrrl]

the fact that it may have been in the Mosaic Law begs the question why it was THERE in the first place?

 

[otrrl]

yes, it was a mikveh but not the standard kind which people usually used as a ritual of purification on their way up to the Temple. this was a mikveh of “living water” – you’re on the right track

 

[otrrl]

the baptism of Jesus is NOTHING if not loaded with the fulfillment of prophecy and Old Testament typology. In no particular order:

1. the Jews were (and are still today) waiting for the return of Elijah. Jesus says that Elijah has returned but they did not recognize him as John the Baptizer (jesus calls him the greatest of all the prophets)
2. the dove – Hebrew “jonah” – this connects Jesus with the prophet Jonah and it connects Jesus with the flood of Noah’s time, where Noah sends out – wait for it – a DOVE to look for dry land, the promised land
3. the baptism of Jesus was by immersion, as the Jewish mikvehs were. Where does that come from? the flood of Noah was the result of God’s judgment where the sins of the people drew God’s wrath on them. So, Jesus takes on himself the sign of God’s wrath, the sins of the world, because – wait for it —
4. Jesus is the LAMB OF GOD ( recall Abraham and Isaac – “God will provide the LAMB” )
5. and at the baptism, Jesus immediately comes out of the water, unlike the people who stayed there, as it were washing themselves to remove their sins – but Jesus was sinless – a foreshadowing of the resurrection
   and
6. go look up the transfer of prophecy from Elijah to Elisha, where a double dose of the Spirit of God comes down on Elisha, as we see the Spirit come down on Jesus.

As someone said above, the BAPTISM of Jesus is SO BIG and exciting, there is so much there to unpack.

He must increase as I decrease

 

[EvangAlived]

2, the dove – Hebrew “jonah” – this connects Jesus with the prophet Jonah and it connects Jesus with the flood of Noah’s time, where Noah sends out – wait for it – a DOVE to look for dry land, the promised land

Excellent stuff.

 

[EvangAlived]

as John the Baptizer

Here is something I heard, but never looked deeper into.

Noah H5146 נח

John G2491 Iōannēs

I heard that John (Oanne;יוחנן) is supposed to be a reversal of Noah.

 

[JimR-OCDS]

This explanation was given by a professor from St John Chrysostom U, on EWTN years back.

First off, Matthew’s Gospel says;

John wore clothing made of camel’s hair and had a leather belt around his waist. His food was locusts and wild honey. Matthew 3:4

There is a reason for Mathew pointing out this detail of John wearing a letter belt, or girdle, for it was the garment worn by the prophets when they anointed the King of the Israelites.

The king asked them, “What was the man like who met you and said these things to you?” They replied, “He[Elijah] wore a hairy garment with a leather belt around his waist. “It is Elijah the Tishbite!” he exclaimed. 2 Kings 7-8

So, the Baptism of Jesus in the Jordan River by John, was actually an anointing of Jesus as King.

Also, it’s believed that the place on the Jordan River, is the spot where the Israelites crossed into the “Promise Land.”

Jim

 

[otrrl]

my head is too big, I can’t connect all those dots.

The ark is a symbol of Eden and the Church. The names are reversed? John <–> Noah ?

 

[neophyte]

yes, it was a mikveh but not the standard kind which people usually used as a ritual of purification on their way up to the Temple. this was a mikveh of “living water” – you’re on the right track

“Living water” is the phrase Jews have always used for the waters of the mikveh. The water of the mikveh had to come from a natural source, directly from God, and not transported by a person. That’s why it was so huge when Jesus told the woman at the well that he could give her living water - it was a claim of divinity.

But that doesn’t address what I said.

 

[neophyte]

This explanation was given by a professor from St John Chrysostom U, on EWTN years back.

First off, Matthew’s Gospel says;

John wore clothing made of camel’s hair and had a leather belt around his waist. His food was locusts and wild honey. Matthew 3:4

Now THAT’s interesting. I’d never heard it before.

 

[JimR-OCDS]

Until EWTN had the Scripture Series on, neither did I.

It was on at least 20 years ago. I have it somewhere in VHS tape

Jim

 

[curious_cath]

the notion that John had authority over Jesus,

2 When John heard in prison what the Messiah[a] was doing, he sent word by his[b] disciples 3 and said to him, “Are you the one who is to come, or are we to wait for another?” 4 Jesus answered them, “Go and tell John what you hear and see: 5 the blind receive their sight, the lame walk, the lepers[c] are cleansed, the deaf hear, the dead are raised, and the poor have good news brought to them. 6 And blessed is anyone who takes no offense at me.” (Matt 11)

You may also read this: Don't Be Offended!

 

[neophyte]

Until EWTN had the Scripture Series on, neither did I.

It was on at least 20 years ago. I have it somewhere in VHS tape

Jim

The thing is, AFAIK the kings were anointed with oil, not baptized with water. Saul, David, Solomon… all were anointed with oil. I don’t recall ever hearing, from any source, of a king of Israel being baptized to the throne.

 

[JimR-OCDS]

Don’t remember the professor addressing this, so I’m going on my own here.

They were earthly Kings and anointed as earthly kings.

Jesus is King of KIngs and King of Heaven, the anointing is from Heaven. " “This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased." Mathew 3;17

And through Baptism, we are connected to Jesus who also was Baptised with water.

CCC
537 Through Baptism the Christian is sacramentally assimilated to Jesus, who in his own baptism anticipates his death and resurrection. The Christian must enter into this mystery of humble self-abasement and repentance, go down into the water with Jesus in order to rise with him, be reborn of water and the Spirit so as to become the Father’s beloved son in the Son and “walk in newness of life”
Let us be buried with Christ by Baptism to rise with him; let us go down with him to be raised with him; and let us rise with him to be glorified with him.239

Everything that happened to Christ lets us know that, after the bath of water, the Holy Spirit swoops down upon us from high heaven and that, adopted by the Father’s voice, we become sons of God.

Jim

 

[promethian_rule]

2 When John heard in prison what the Messiah[a] was doing, he sent word by his[b] disciples 3 and said to him, “Are you the one who is to come, or are we to wait for another?” 4 Jesus answered them, “Go and tell John what you hear and see: 5 the blind receive their sight, the lame walk, the lepers[c] are cleansed, the deaf hear, the dead are raised, and the poor have good news brought to them. 6 And blessed is anyone who takes no offense at me.” (Matt 11)

… That’s the first century equivalent of replying to an email. I don’t see in that any of the notion that John had authority over Jesus. Merely a polite inquiry about prophecy and a polite response.

And that site borrows from an article in a protestant magazine. I was hoping for something a little more… authoritative.

 

[curious_cath]

that site borrows from an article in a protestant magazine

Protestant theology is not altogether warped. It depends on the denomination and the theologian. You may find pearls if you open your heart and eyes.

Merely a polite inquiry about prophecy and a polite response.

Oops, I don’t think so! You should see what is behind “politeness”. John was in prison, close to becoming a martyr sacrificed for the pleasure of a young woman. The same John is contacting Jesus in an urgency from the prison to question Him about His teaching. Which teaching of Jesus could have alarmed him that much?

John is questioning Jesus as if with authority, as if a master questions his disciple. Jesus submitted Himself to a ritual of an earthly prophet, the baptism of John! This prompted Him to run to the desert for 40 days where He abandoned all earthly desire and aspiration for the Kingdom. He realized who He was and is!

Still, He has to defend himself against John now who became indignant with Him. He is questioning if Jesus is the one or there will be another coming. Wow, is this not the doubt speaking out of him? Jesus has to defend himself. He refers to the miracles of healing. This should be sufficient evidence that He is the Son of God. He even says of John: “the least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he” (Matt 11: 11). Was he angry with John for questioning Him?

Jesus, as fully divine, established the Holy Sacrament of baptism, superseding the water-baptism of John. This was the evidence that He came from God and the Holy Spirit was in Him.

 

[Gorgias]

If the real presence is not physically demonstrable what is putting a consecrated host in a monstrance and adoration all about?

When a soldier salutes a flag, does he see patriotism, or duty, or honor? Does he see the promise that he made to defend this country? Or, does he see a flag and from that, know these other, unseen things?

Adoration is about knowing that Jesus is present in the Eucharist, even though we only see the physical appearance of bread.

What is physically demonstrable is physically observed. In that observation – knowing what we know – we recognize what we’re looking at, even if we can’t see a physical presence of Jesus (who is sacramentally present in the Eucharist).

 

[Gorgias]

Gorgias:

Does it wash away sins? Or, does it merely demonstrate that the baptized wishes to repent?

Acts 22:17.

“[Paul said,] ‘After I had returned to Jerusalem and while I was praying in the temple, I fell into a trance’”…? Umm… not sure why you’re quoting that. Nevertheless, the baptism you’re referencing there (Acts 22:16) is the sacramental baptism of Jesus’ command to the apostles, not John’s baptism.

Then go back and see Mark 1:4-5 (repentance for remission of their sins, confessing their sins); Luke 3:3;

Does the remission of sins come from John? (If so, then what need is there of Jesus?) Rather, wouldn’t you say that the washing comes from John, but the remission of sins comes from Jesus’ death and resurrection? And, since that’s the case, it means that John’s baptism isn’t what you’re claiming it is.

John 3:3-15 (with Nicodemus;

Does Jesus offer this baptism to Nicodemus at that moment? Or, given His assertion that He must be “lifted up” (John 3:14) tell us that this baptism – and salvation – happens after He has been lifted up?

A person who is baptized, such as when John was baptizing, does not merely “wish” to repent, but is actually of “repentance”, since they were obeying God to do so

Great. So, please tell me: did God forgive the sins of those who repented and were baptized by John? Or, did the real effects of sacramental baptism only begin when, well… sacramental baptism was actually commanded by Christ to His apostles?

If you want to claim that people were truly sorry when John dunked them, I’m cool with that. However, if you want real effects, then those didn’t happen until Christ rose from the dead and commanded his apostles to baptize in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.

(by the way, is full bodily immersion in water in every single case in scripture)

Ezekiel 36:25 – “I will sprinkle clean water over you to make you clean; from all your impurities and from all your idols I will cleanse you.”

Moses took the blood of the covenant and sprinkled it on the people (Exodus 24:8).

Even if you want to make a case for immersion, please tell me: do you see immersion in the baptisms (for example, of Jesus or of Philip’s Ethiopian eunuch), or do you presume it? After all, we don’t read “John immersed Jesus” or “Philip immersed the Ethiopean”! We simply see that they went down to the water and that they came up again. If you only infer immersion, you cannot assert that it’s required.

 

[Hodos]

Because when Jesus goes in the water he leaves the righteousness of a perfect life. When we go into the water we leave our sin. When Jesus comes up out of the water he carries our sin to the cross. When we come out of the water we carry the righteousness of Christ to the Father.

“Or don’t you know that all of us who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? We were therefore buried with him through baptism into death in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, we too may live a new life. For if we have been united with him in a death like his, we will certainly also be united with him in a resurrection like his. For we know that our old self was crucified with him so that the body ruled by sin might be done away with, that we should no longer be slaves to sin - because anyone who has died to sin has been set free from sin.”