Jeremy Sexton wrote this in an earlier line of discussion:
“Along those lines, I think what we most often miss in our theology of baptism (though Calvin didn’t miss this) is that Christian baptism — if it “is” anything that came before — is Jesus’ water baptism. In our baptism, we receive the same waters and same Spirit that Jesus received in his baptism. Our baptism is Jesus’ baptism, which means that we need to see baptism, foremost, as God’s opening heaven, sending down his Holy Spirit upon us, calling us his beloved son or daughter, and ordaining us into priestly service.”
Well, yes and no. Jesus received the old baptism from John, which set Him aside for His work. The baptism of Jesus on the cross follows from this, and thereafter His resurrection in glory and ascension to the throne. The baptism that follows this, on Pentecost and thereafter, is not the same as Jesus’ baptism, but is the eschatologically advanced and glorified version of it. Jesus was not baptized into glory; we are.
Moreover, in Jesus’ baptism the Spirit proceeded from the Father, placing Him in union with the Adamic calling and position. In our baptism, the Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son, placing us in union with the Son’s glory.
Comments?
Yes.
Jesus’ baptism and the unique proclamation that accompanied it were also a fore-runner of the resurrection, though, and I think played a crucial role in Jesus of Nazareth’s perfect trust in His father. During His struggles with the task set before Him (to drink the cup of judgment to the dregs for His people), He could look back to His own coming up from the symbolic judgment waters and the attendant approval as the Father’s promise to bring the Son out of the true judgment waters of death in a way that fully announced His Sonship (Rom. 1:4). Thus, Jesus’ faith was not some secret thing, but rather, like ours, was tied to His baptism, to the Father’s promise to Him to bring Him out of the waters. Jesus believed what the Father said in baptism, and so should we.
How does this reconcile with the line of reasoning that often speaks of John’s Baptism (and therefore Jesus’ baptism) as a rite of covenant renewal preached by John towards repentance and Christian Baptism being that of covenant initiation?
It seems to me that this angle would stress a significant amount of dissonance between the two rites in there role and subsequently their meaning.
Comments?
“their” -sorry
Jon, ours IS for repentance, but it is also communicative of accomplished glory.
Joshua, all you say is true, but I want somehow to maintain that the death/res aspect of Jesus’ baptism by John is that of the Old Creation, which is not a res in glory but a resuscitation of Adamic life. People come back from the dead, but are not raised in glory. It is only after Jesus dies the “gooddeath” at the Tree of Knowledge (His second death on the cross) that He can be raised in glory. His water baptism by John, and the baptism of Noah, etc., pointed in that direction, but did not deliver it.
Make sense?
I wish I could think of myself as a seasoned Presbyterian, but my migration to Geneva is still a few years shy of it’s decade mark, so I pose this in all humility:
I am a bit puzzled at how the insistence on Christian baptism being for repentance reconciles with it’s application to infants of believers. I agree that articulation is not the essence of faith (and quite possibly not the essence of repentance), so perhaps the “obligation” aspect may play a role in understanding this? I’m game for any guidance in further reading so as to refrain from any dominance of the comments to this post.
Blessings.
James,
I don’t know–I agree that OT resurrections, including Lazarus, were certainly more ‘resuscitations,’ since they rose to the old life, but it seems that Jesus’ baptism was something more than just John’s baptism. The Father added to this old symbol His own proclamation that this was His true son, and this very proclamation was made most fully in the resurrection. So, it seems that Jesus’ baptism is connected more to the new life of resurrection–but this is not a native part of John’s baptism, but rather the Father special anointing.
Does that fit with the old-new pattern more generally? For the old to lead to new life, God must add a new act on His part? That seems to capture both the continuity and the discontinuity: the old way is there to bring us to the new act of God…
Recently did Jesus’ baptism in John, and it shows the purpose of his baptism = to reveal the Messiah to Israel. His was not a baptism that remitted sin, so what was it for? To show John the Prophet of Israel that a particular Israelite, his cousin Jesus, is the King. He then points to him before Israel and says, “There he is!”
The sign was of course the opening of heaven, the dove, and the identification of him by the heavenly voice. By these “infallible proofs” the Messiah is revealed to Israel, and to us.
In these ways his baptism is unique and unrepeatable.
One textual similarity/difference with the accounts of the baptism of Jesus and His transfiguration give support to the view that the baptism of Jesus by John was at least immature. The transfiguration passages are certainly “baptism” language: “He was transfigured before them. His clothes became shining, exceedingly white, like snow, such as no launderer on earth can whiten them.” A cloud descended and covered and the Father announced again the name “My beloved Son”. Now the difference – “This is my beloved Son in whom I am well pleased – HEAR HIM”.
Is the “Hear Him” difference a maturity/judgment/knowledge difference? Especially in the context of the Old Testament tutors and guardians (Moses and Elijah) being swallowed up in Jesus?
Blessings,
Mahaffey
Jon,
I think that you have already answered your own question about repentance and infant baptism. The Bible speaks of infants knowing and trusting God in multiple texts, so there is such a thing as infant faith. Repentance and faith are inextricably linked like two sides of the same coin. To trust in God is to turn away from all idols that compete for our allegiance. So if we recognize that faith can exist in very young children and can mature as they grow, why not a kind of repentance as well?
And, as you also mention, baptism is the beginning of a life of discipleship with faith and repentance at its core. By baptizing infants, we are recognizing that the children of believing parents begin their lives as disciples from their earliest days and that they obligated to follow that path marked out by baptism in greater and greater maturity throughout their life.
Joshua, Curate has given the answer I think is central: Jesus’ baptism by a prophet is largely David’s anointing by Samuel. Jesus has to be a king in order to die for His people. And Sean has a point in that Jesus’ absorption of the kingly role has two phases: Victories in Saul’s house, and then after the transfiguration, a wilderness road to suffering, after which will come ascension to the throne.
I don’t have all this worked out, but it seems to be the pattern. Maybe N. T. Voldemort-Wright has it worked out somewhere — if we DARE to read him!!!!
Mike,
Thanks for your thoughts. Have you any on the distinction I noted between John’s baptism being that of covenant of renewal and Christian Baptism being that of covenant initiation?
Blessings,
Jon
James, the Samuel and Saul/Samuel and David anointing reference is spot on. Saul upon his anointing changes from a coward hiding among the camel saddles to defeating the Philistines, and David follows his anointing by defeating Goliath. King Jesus immediately goes into the wilderness to defeat Satan, the most formidable enemy of them all. There he rules over the beasts, and is attended by angels. Who but the greatest king of them all could achieve such feats of power and dominion?
Each of them by their respective acts proves to Israel that he is God’s chosen and approved king.
Yes, after my initial post I speculated further:
David defeats Goliath after initial anointing = wilderness
David fights and teaches = Jesus fighting demons and teaching
David suffers = from transfiguration to cross
David rules partially for 7 1/2 years = Jesus rules until AD 70
David rules over all = conquest of world after AD 70
At any rate, a speculation.
Yes.
More fuel for this: Saul is the first Christ, David the second, and the Lord Jesus is the greatest Christ, greater even than Solomon, the Son of God.
The voice calling him Son of God is not a Nicene declaration, but refers to 2 Samuel 7 where God takes Solomon as his son, saying, I will be your father and you will be my son.
Of course, Jesus’ re-enactment of Israel is much closer to the surface of the text: He is baptized in the waters (cf. 1 Cor. 10), then goes into the wilderness to be tested (Deut. 8:2), and passes by holding to the cov’t (cf. His responses to the accuser, all from the cov’t document of Deuteronomy). But this is also part of the sonship motif, as seen in Ex. 4:22-23 & Hos. 11:1. In fact, Israel’s sonship precedes the king’s sonship–I suppose that’s a part of the maturity theme…
[...] bookmarks tagged ours Jesus’ Baptism and ours saved by 5 others freakycallbackgirl bookmarked on 02/17/08 | [...]