This past Sunday, in the Sunday school class I attend, the lesson was on Luke 3-4: the accounts of John the Baptist, Jesus’ baptism and temptations, and Jesus’ early ministry. Having not grown up in either a Baptist or Church of Christ, I was not aware of the controversy over John’s “baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins.” Apparently, this is the verse used in the Church of Christ to justify their belief that unless you actually get baptized, then your sins are not forgiven.
In any case, much of the discussion revolved around the questions, “Does baptism save you?” and “Is there a ‘second anointing’ of the Holy Spirit after one’s initial baptism?” Church of Christ people would say, “Yes, getting dunked is what saves you.” This reminded me of a time in college when the Church of Christ church I attended for a short time (I was so naïve, I didn’t know it actually was Church of Christ!) chose to baptize a college girl who had had two nervous breakdowns only a few weeks before, had been in the hospital, had been heavily medicated, and who had just gotten out of the hospital (still heavily medicated). She had declared she wanted to get baptized so she could be a leader in the college ministry backed by the church. So, despite the fact she was not in her right mind AND drugged, the church baptized her “just to be safe.” To this day, that memory angers me.
As for the other question, Assemblies of God people would say, “Of course there’s a ‘second anointing’! Could you imagine what an impact Billy Graham would have had if he had only had that ‘second anointing’ and spoke in tongues?” (I kid you not, there were a few women in the church I grew up that said that).
In any case, it was an odd experience for me: a “blast from the past” on both questions. I couldn’t help thinking, “Both questions are totally misguided and miss the point of what is going on in Luke (and for the gospels, for that matter). In order to understand John’s “Baptism for Repentance,” you need to know the narrative that first century Jews were living out. If you do that, you’ll see that John was not talking about what most Christians think he’s talking about.
A Look Back to the Exile and the Unfulfilled Hopes of a New Exodus
To understand the scene into which the New Testament comes, you have to go back to the return from exile that began with Cyrus the Great’s decree in 539 BC. The Jews had been sent into exile in 587 BC because YHWH had had enough of their idolatrous ways. YHWH had brought the curses of the Mosaic covenant to pass. That covenant was broken and finished. There was no more land, king, temple, nation, and no more people of God. Surprisingly, though, as Isaiah 40 states, YHWH had not forsaken His people. He called them out of exile.
The expectations were quite logical to the returning Jews. They were going back to the Promised Land! This was a New Exodus! Therefore, they expected to soon have a new king and a new temple. They expected YHWH to re-make them into a great nation that would rule the world and display YHWH’s glory and power to the nations.
…but most of that never happened. They rebuilt a shabby temple; there never was another king from the line of David; they never really had their own nation—they were always under the thumb of some foreign power. And even worse, shortly after their return from exile, the spirit of prophecy ceased. The Jews became full-aware that YHWH’s presence was not with them. Therefore, they waited, and thought, and studied the Torah. Their conclusion was that the reason why this “New Exodus” had not fully come to pass was that they had not sufficiently kept Torah. Yes, they were God’s people, but they weren’t quite “good enough” for God to fully bless them again.
The Intertestamental period (the 400 years before Christ’s birth) was a mixed bag of mostly blood, battles, and very few glimmers of hope. One segment of the Jewish population became obsessed with Torah-keeping (i.e. Pharisees); another sect decided to make the best of it and suck up to Rome in order to get privileges (i.e. Sadducees); another sect were essentially the Al-Qaeda of Judaism (i.e. the Zealots); and still another sect saw everything as so hopelessly corrupt, that they literally moved out to the Judean desert and made their own extremist community (i.e. the Qumran community). What they all agreed on, though, was this: YHWH’s presence was gone, and their community had tons of problems.
John the Baptist…What’s Going On? (Just Look for the Obvious Clues!)
And so, when John the Baptist showed up, prophesying in the wilderness, it wasn’t just “Hey, prophecy is back!” First, he was dressed like Elijah—Malachi 4:5 had prophesied that a prophet like Elijah would show up shortly before the “Day of YHWH.” Now, what was the “Day of YHWH”? Simply put, it was when God Himself would come vindicate and purify His people, and judge evil-doers who oppress His people. Therefore, John’s presence and get-up essentially was telling people, “The Day of YHWH is near!”
Second, he was prophesying in the wilderness and quoting Isaiah 40—the very prophecy that had urged the exiles to return to the Promised Land, and prophesied that YHWH would once again enact salvation for them. Therefore, the Jews saw in John’s prophetic work the indication that the fulfillment of the long-awaited “New Exodus” was about to happen.
Finally, John was baptizing in the Jordan River—the border to the Promised Land, the very river Joshua had led the Israelites over in order to possess the Promised Land. This also had echoes of the crossing through the Red Sea under Moses, as well as echoes of Elijah—he and Elisha had crossed over the Jordan, Elijah was taken up to heaven, and Elisha crossed back over the Jordan with a double portion of the spirit of Elijah. John’s actions were clear–this was a “New Exodus” re-enactment. It was saying that YHWH was about to come for His people.
John’s Baptism
This brings us to John’s baptism. What was it for? It was for “repentance” and “the forgiveness of sins.” The Jews who came out to John were not “repenting of their sins so they could be forgiven and go to heaven when they die.” They were repenting of both personal and national sins. As Jews they were repenting of their Jewish national sins. And why? So that YHWH would return His presence to them…so that they could have a king again, be a great nation again, and finally be God’s people to rule the world. The significance of the Jordan River should be obvious—they were symbolically passing over the Jordan River, ready to “take possession” of the Land and the promises of YHWH. It was their symbolic “New Exodus” declaration.
John’s teachings, therefore, make sense in this scenario: he condemns their sin and emphasizes that being “children of Abraham” gets you nothing. And when they ask what they should do, he emphasizes fairness and charity—the very things ancient Israel, stemming from their idolatry, failed to do.
What the Jews didn’t get, though (and apparently John was a bit foggy on this too), was what God’s plan really was. He wasn’t aiming to re-establish a Jewish nation to be the greatest kingdom on the earth. He wasn’t simply content with a “New Exodus” for the Jewish people. The whole Mosaic covenant was essentially a subset of YHWH’s covenant with Abraham, and the goal of the Abrahamic covenant was blessing for all nations. The Mosaic covenant was the “constitution” for ancient Israel. They broke it, suffered its curses, and “died” as a nation. The Mosaic covenant was over and done with.
When they returned from the exile, though, there was that lingering prophesy of Jeremiah 31:31-34 that promised a New Covenant that would not be like the Mosaic Covenant. So what would it look like? Ironically, the Jews of John’s day expected it to look a lot like the Mosaic Covenant! But God’s plan soon became apparent in Jesus…
Jesus’ Baptism and Temptations…Do You Understand Them Now?
When Jesus came to get baptized by John, he wasn’t repenting of any personal sins—he was, as a Jew, identifying with the national sin of the Jewish people: they had failed to truly be the people of God. With Jesus, though, as God’s promised Messiah-King, he identifies with the failed Jewish people, and when he does so, the Holy Spirit descends on him. What this scene is saying, therefore, is that in Jesus, the long-awaited promised Messiah, the Spirit of God had once again descended.
But then what does Jesus do? He immediately goes out to the wilderness. It is there he is tempted by the Devil. What needs to be pointed out is that for every of the three temptations Jesus responds by quoting verses from Deuteronomy. Specifically, those three verses correspond to specific times during the Israelites’ wilderness wanderings where they failed God. The significance of Jesus’ temptation answers would not be lost on the original audience: Where Israel had failed to be faithful to God, Jesus had succeeded in being faithful to God.
Once that happened, Jesus returned to the Promised Land, went off to Galilee, and started to proclaim, “The Kingdom of God is at hand!” His kingdom, though, would be very different from the expectations of the nationalist Jews. He welcomed sinners, tax-collectors, and even Gentiles. Now this post can be made into a book with all the implications this has for things throughout the gospels, but I’ll just say this here: Jesus demonstrated that the long-awaited “New Exodus” would be nothing less that God’s “New Creation” in which he pours out His Spirit on all flesh (not just Jews), where He displays the power of the Kingdom of God, not by defeating foreign nations, but by defeating death itself at the resurrection.
Conclusion
With all this in mind, you’ll find yourself looking back at the old arguments of “Does water baptism save you?” and “Is there a ‘second baptism’ of the Holy Spirit when you speak in tongues?” with perplexity. You’ll realize that none of that is being addressed here with John’s baptism!
So much more can be said, but I’ll have to leave it at that for now. Comments and questions welcomed!
