JESUS’
BAPTISM AND THE QUESTIONS ABOUT JESUS’ PRACTICE OF BAPTISM OF HIS FOLLOWERS
All four canonical Gospels
explore different aspects of Jesus’ baptism. Mark (1.9-11) places it as the
opening event in Jesus’ life as the confirmation of Jesus’ selection by God
with a ‘voice’ which declares Jesus’ special status (Mk 1.11). Matthew (3.13-17)
and Luke (3.21-22) expound the story with different theological agendas.
Matthew points out the resistance of John the Baptist to baptize Jesus, while
Luke omits the role of John, while reaffirming Markian tradition of the voice
from heaven which declares Jesus’ unique status. The Gospel of John does not
mention the baptism of Jesus, but its theological focus is on the
identification of Jesus as ‘the lamb of God who takes away the sin of the
world’ (Jn 1.29). John also highlights the mission of Jesus who will practise
the true ‘baptism by the Holy Spirit’, not just ablution with water (Jn 1.33).
The imminent question is: ‘why was Jesus baptised?’ and no doubt the Synoptic
sources will give three different reasons: Matthew ‘to fulfil righteousness’,
Mark and Luke to facilitate the appointment as God’s ‘beloved son’. This
identification is especially important to Mark, as he does not have the
nativity story, so we lack the Lukian report on the conversation between angel
Gabriel and Mary (1.26-38). We may conclude, both historically and
theologically, that Jesus encountered John the Baptist and that that encounter
was a changing point in Jesus’ life.
Did Jesus continue John’s mission
and baptize his followers? Unlike the Synoptics, the Fourth Gospel preserves
some short but slightly confusing references to that kind of activity (Jn 3.22
and 26, then later 4.1-2). Let’s look more carefully. The first reference
states:
After this Jesus and his
disciples went into the Judean countryside, and he spent some time there with
them and baptized. [. . .] They came to John and said to him, ‘Rabbi, the one
who was with you across the Jordan, to whom you testified, here he is baptizing,
and all are going to him.’
The text, without any alternative
readings, clearly states that Jesus was (the Greek uses here the imperfect
tense) baptizing for some time. Brown suggests that this was a baptism similar
to John the Baptist and not a later Christian ritual. Beasley-Murray argues for
the historicity of Jesus’ role as the one who was baptizing and who authorized
his followers to perform this act.1 This Scriptural testimony is later
contradicted in Jn 4.1-2:
Now when Jesus learned that the
Pharisees had heard, ‘Jesus is making and baptizing more disciples than John’ –
although it was not Jesus himself but his disciples who baptized.
Again, the manuscripts are
unanimous about v 2 and the noticeable editorial intervention and explanation
of the previous statement in Jn 3.22. Still, we see that the followers of Jesus
practised some form of ablution as a possible sign of repentance and then acted
as having become members of the earliest community around Jesus. It is clearer
from the Acts of the Apostles (2.38- 42) that catechumens were introduced to
Christian fellowship by baptism ‘in the name of Jesus Christ’ (2.38). However,
as we know from the note in the Acts of the Apostles, a certain Apollos from
Alexandria ‘knew only the baptism of John’ (18.25). Similarly, in Paul’s
teaching (1 Cor. 1.13 and 15), the ritual happened with different wording (‘in
the name of . . .). Ferguson highlights that the baptism ‘in the name of
Jesus’s’ was:
an expression of faith in him and
in worship towards him.
Concluding the limited evidence
from the emerging authority of the canonical Gospels and Pauline teaching, it
is correct to say that baptism was an initiatory ritual offered to adults. It
was seen in relation to John’s practice; however, after Jesus’ death and
resurrection, Christians understood it as the fundamental relationship between
the believer and Christ. That vital link was expressed by the idiom ‘in the
name of Jesus Christ’. Baptism, as understood by the early followers of Jesus,
brought forgiveness of previous sins, endowed the gifts of the Holy Spirit and
led to salvation. Personal faith and commitment to a new way of life were
crucial. Further, direct link with other members of the community expounds the
social, not private or esoteric, character of baptism. (Piotr
Ashwin-Siejkowski, “Community and Liturgy: Emerging of the Trinitarian formula
baptism,” in T&T Clark Handbook of The Early Church, ed. Ilaria L.
E. Ramelli; John Anthony McGuckin; Piotr Ashwin-Siejkowski [London: T&T
Clark, 2022], 262-64)