This text comprises most of Luke’s account of the ministry of John the Baptist (3:1-20, paralleled by Matthew 3:1-12; Mark 1:1-8; John 1:6-8, 15, 19-28). That ministry, focused on the preaching of a message of radical social change accompanied by the symbolic act of baptism, both paved the way and provided a model for the ministry of Jesus that followed.
Verses 1-2 are similar to Luke 1:1-4.[1] 1In the fifteenth year of the reign of Emperor Tiberius, (suggesting around 28 AD) when Pontius Pilate was governor of Judea (26-36 AD), and Herod was ruler of Galilee, and his brother Philip ruler of the region of Ituraea and Trachonitis, and Lysanias ruler of Abilene, (both rule into the 30s) 2 during the high priesthood of Annas (6-15) and Caiaphas (18-36 or 37). The opening verses of this text feature one of Luke's most distinguishing authorial characteristics. More than any other gospel writer, Luke uses historical figures and chronological sequencing in ways that move narratives out of the political, economic, and sociological vacuum in which we might have some temptation to see them. Stylistically formal and rich in its detail, the narrative focuses on the historical scaffold that supports it. The reason Luke goes into such detail, however, is more of a literary question than a historical inquiry. Multiple historical dating in traditional Greco‑Roman literary style was a signal of the beginning of the main part of their narrative. The point Luke is making is not that Jesus is a contemporary of Augustus, but that they are contemporary to Jesus.[2] The writers of the Gospels distinguish their writing from myth proclaiming timeless truths by underlining the temporal limitations to which Jesus was subject. Palestine, Galilee, Jerusalem, and Rome provide a definite place in history for Jesus.[3] Thus, Luke is opening an important section of his work. It is the final preparatory step before Jesus himself begins active ministry. Luke unrolls a litany of secular rulers (he could have learned about the exact dates of Tiberius' reign by consulting Tacitus) as well as the most authoritative religious figures in the temple establishment of Jerusalem (although the wording of Luke's text implies an understanding of Annas and Caiphas as a kind of co‑high priests).
The word of God came to John son of Zechariah in the wilderness.[4] John has received a special call, which Luke reinforces by using the traditional prophetic "call" formula. The list of the proud and powerful is in sharp contrast with the introduction of John, son of Zechariah, who was simply "in the wilderness." However, John's access to power comes from a different, non-Roman source. The urbanity of the Roman powers contrasts with the rural setting that John's power gives him. Into this secular and religious world of highly recognizable authorities, Luke introduces the unlikely figure of "John, son of Zechariah." After all the historical references, Luke's superscription enigmatically highlights the striking contrast between the perceived power brokers who occupy the political and religious mountaintops and the Lord's servant who wanders humbly in the wilderness and receives God's word. His prophetic career will have worldwide impact.
Verses 3-6, which depend upon Mark, presents John as one sent from God to prepare for the inauguration of the period of salvation.
Historical information about John the Baptist is sparse, both within and outside of the Bible. The only non-New Testament reference is in Josephus, Antiquities of the Jews, Book XVIII, Chapter 5, Section 2.
2. Now some of the Jews thought that the destruction of Herod's army came from God, and that very justly, as a punishment of what he did against John, that was called the Baptist: for Herod slew him, who was a good man, and commanded the Jews to exercise virtue, both as to righteousness towards one another, and piety towards God, and so to come to baptism; for that the washing [with water] would be acceptable to him, if they made use of it, not in order to the putting away [or the remission] of some sins [only], but for the purification of the body; supposing still that the soul was thoroughly purified beforehand by righteousness. Now when [many] others came in crowds about him, for they were very greatly moved [or pleased] by hearing his words, Herod, who feared lest the great influence John had over the people might put it into his power and inclination to raise a rebellion, (for they seemed ready to do any thing he should advise,) thought it best, by putting him to death, to prevent any mischief he might cause, and not bring himself into difficulties, by sparing a man who might make him repent of it when it would be too late. Accordingly he was sent a prisoner, out of Herod's suspicious temper, to Macherus, the castle I before mentioned, and was there put to death. Now the Jews had an opinion that the destruction of this army was sent as a punishment upon Herod, and a mark of God's displeasure to him.
Although Luke does not now give up as many details about John's lifestyle and appearance as do some of the other gospel writers, Luke does make enough observations about John to suggest that the Baptist had ties with the ascetical Qumran community. The Baptist and Qumran had some connections. However, it is also clear at this point that the Baptist is on his own, undertaking his own ministry with its own unique agenda. Luke also emphasizes the mysterious nature of God's ways – how the word of God brings down oppressive leaders and transforms broken lives. Oblivious to the power of governments, John 3 went into all the region around the Jordan, (πασαν περιχωρον του Ιορδανου)[5] the territory of Qumran), proclaiming (κηρύσσων ‑‑ "speak with authority") a baptism of repentance (μετανοίας ‑‑ "change of mind"), a purposeful turning from sin will result in the life-transforming experience for the forgiveness of sins, (mirroring aspects of the Qumran ablution rites and imminent judgment from God). Submitting to baptism was a concrete expression of the act of repentance. Such confession took place before or during baptism. The good news as found in the preaching of John is that forgiveness of sin is already available. Thus, the first step is simple honesty. We sin, we wander, we lie, and we do not know how to save ourselves through our efforts. Repentance is the admission that in our sin we need to receive forgiveness. Yet, the first step has a close relation to the second step, in which we acknowledge that God forgives. The good news begins in Mark as John invites people to receive forgiveness. We can receive the gift of washing, cleansing, and new birth. We can start over, fresh, like a newborn infant. God forgives. Such is the beginning and end of the good news. For all sin, God forgives. Outside the ascetic life of John is despair, the proud attitude that denies the need for or the possibility of forgiveness.[6] Sinners have all the advantages in this good news. God is willing to stay with us in our meanness, weakness, and stubborn self-righteousness. We are better off spiritually if we confess our sins rather than keep a list of the sins of others against us.[7]
Further, when John preached and issued a call for baptism, it would neither have shocked first-century Jews nor disturbed the ruling class. Ritual washings in mikva'ot (immersion baths or pools) were commonplace, and people believed that this practice cleansed the body of its chronic profanity and sanctified it for worship of God. This proclamation is undoubtedly what leads Luke to specifically identify John the Baptist's message as the beginning of the "good news" (see Luke 3:18) God intends for the people of Israel. Such baptism was a ritual lustration with roots already established within Jewish practice. Ritual purification with water was an important feature of Israelite religion, particularly with regard to the impurity associated with various aspects of sexuality (e.g., intercourse and childbirth; see, e.g., Leviticus 15:18; Numbers 19:13). Ritual practices were widespread in Greco-Roman religion also, especially in cults associated with healing deities. While it is clear, therefore, that the practice of ritual purification with water did not originate with John the Baptist (and common sense would suggest that there was no one “inventor” of the practice), the New Testament first identifies baptism with John’s ministry and preaching, and only later and more significantly associated with Jesus (e.g., Matthew 29:19). In any case, for all its associations with the Greek and Jewish world, the baptism of John was unique.
Repentance is John’s hopeful word, pointing out our self-deceiving beliefs that we are good, worthy, deserving of our salvation and reminding us that our lives need turning around, to experiencing the washing in the cleansing waters of baptism as we anticipate the coming of the one mightier than John is. One does not experience enlightenment by simply imagining the light. One must also become conscious of the darkness.[8] Every day is judgment day. Through our deeds and words, our silence and speech, we are writing in the Book of Life.[9]
C.S. Lewis describes the unrepentant condition as being in a "hole" where we need the help of a friend (i.e., a savior) to get us out. Into what sort of hole is it that we have gotten ourselves? It is behaving as if we belonged to ourselves. We are not simply imperfect creatures who need improvement; we are rebels who must lie down our arms. "Laying down your arms, surrendering, saying you are sorry, realizing that you have been on the wrong track and getting ready to start life over again from the ground floor -- that is the only way out of a 'hole,'" says Lewis. This process of surrender is what we call repentance (the underlying Greek word means "changing the mind" or "turning around"), and it is what John was calling for in his prophetic preaching. Lewis adds this important note: "... this repentance ... is not something God demands of you before he will take you back and which he could let you off if he chose: it is simply a description of what going back to him is like." We cannot be right with God without repentance; it is like asking God to take us back without going back.[10]
The writer Kathleen Norris gives us another way to understand repentance. She tells of working as an artist-in-residence at a parochial school and telling children something about the psalms. The kids are often astonished to discover that the psalmists expressed the more unacceptable emotions like sadness and anger, even anger at God. She says that because the children know what it is like to be small in a world designed for big people. They identify quite readily with the psalmists, and often do quite well when she invites them to write their own psalms.
She tells of one boy who wrote a poem/psalm called "The Monster Who Was Sorry." He began by admitting that he hated it when his father yelled at him, and in the poem, he pictures himself responding by throwing his sister down the stairs, wrecking his room and then wrecking the whole town. The poem ends with, "Then I sit in my messy house and say to myself, 'I shouldn't have done that.'" Norris concludes her account of this boy's poem by referring to the fourth-century monks who guided beginners in the faith and suggesting that those monks would have told this boy "that he was well on the way toward repentance, not such a monster after all, but only human. If the house is messy, they might have said, why not clean it up, why not make it into a place where God might wish to dwell?"[11]
Stephen Vincent Benét once wrote a Christmas play in which the wife of the innkeeper -- truly a bit part, if ever there was one -- has a memorable line. Looking on in wonder at the strange events of that holy night, the innkeeper's wife realizes that something of tremendous import has happened there in her husband's barn. Therefore, she declares:
Rise up! The loves we had were not enough.
Something is loosed to change the shaken world,
And with it we must change!
That is the message of John the Baptist. Something has happened, and we must change.
Luke amplifies one distinctive aspect of John's baptism; it flows directly from the prophet Isaiah, 4 as it is written in the book of the words of the prophet Isaiah (40:3, an important text for Qumran),[12] “The voice of one crying out in the wilderness: ‘Prepare the way of the Lord, make his paths straight. A straight path befits a path for royalty. A path with curves may hide lurking enemies. Isaiah describes the results of the appearance of the messianic king. He does so through a series of contrasting pairs. 5 Every valley shall be filled, and every mountain and hill shall be made low, and the crooked shall be made straight, and the rough ways made smooth. The contrasting pairs describe the perfected nature of life. It describes the improvements that await the created order. Finally, the presence of the Messiah-King will influence humanity as 6 all flesh shall see (experience) the salvation of God,’ the accomplishment of the true work of God. Clearly, the baptism of John is not merely an acknowledgment of bodily uncleanness, but a recognition that the complete transformation of each person's heart, soul and mind is also required (cf. Luke 3:8-14; 7:29-30; 20:1-8). We can see that John’s importance for the writers of the gospels is prophetic, pointing the way toward the one of whom Israel’s religious tradition prophesied, of which John clearly saw himself a part. From the wilderness, he declared the word of the Lord to the crowds who came to him under the nose of the recognized establishment. What a reversal, especially given that the imperial and religious authorities believed that they controlled the people. John himself inaugurates the fulfillment of Israel's consolation that she had anticipated ever since the Babylonian exile (587-539 B.C.). This text, associated with the return of Elijah before the coming of the Messiah, itself authenticates John the Baptist's ascetic lifestyle, the wilderness location of his preaching and the message of promised salvation that he offers.
The baptism of John continues to have significance for Christians. The fact that Jesus will submit himself to his baptism should be sufficient reason. God forgives sin, brings deliverance, and gives the gift of salvation. It means acceptance of daily repentance so that a new self will arise to live with God.[13] Some Christian traditions have learned to have some embarrassment over the stereotype of old-fashioned preachers hammering their people on sin and making people feel guilty. To them, talk of repentance makes them nervous. This feeling has some truth contained in it. A French proverb says that years of repentance are necessary to blot out a sin in the eyes of human beings, but one tear of repentance suffices with God. Approached from another perspective, however, repentance is the doorway to the spiritual life and is, in fact, the only way to begin. Repentance is the journey of discipleship and the only way to continue in the path. Anything else is foolishness and self-delusion. Repentance suggests a form of both brute honesty and joyfulness that we will need for the spiritual journey. Of what in our past do we need to repent to allow God to do a new thing in us? Of what do we need forgiveness? Whom do we need to forgive to begin moving toward a different future? We might ask the question differently. From what do we need healing? The cleansing of the Baptist talked was not just a matter of what happened in the past. Such fresh and new people will receive the Holy Spirit that prepares them for ministry and mission.
[1] This confirms for some scholars that Luke had written his gospel beginning with Chapter 3, and later added Chapters 1-2. However, Luke may follow contemporary style. Ancient Jewish historian Josephus self‑avowedly imitated Thucydides' style by opening major sections of his work with lists of dates. Therefore, it is likely that Luke here is signaling to his readers the beginning of a new important section of his work.
[2] Barth (Church Dogmatics IV.2 [64.3], 160).
[3] Barth, Church Dogmatics III.2 [47.1], 441).
[4] Here is a minor agreement between Matthew and Luke against Mark, where they introduce John the Baptist before the quote from Isaiah, whereas Mark famously opens his gospel with the quote from Isaiah and then introduces John the Baptist.
[5] Here is a major agreement of Matthew and Luke against Mark. Matthew 3.5 has πασα η περιχωρος του Ιορδανου; Luke 3.3 has πασαν περιχωρον του Ιορδανου. This geographical phrase is relatively rare.
[6] Kathleen Morris, The Cloister Walk, New York: Riverhead Books, 1996, p. 128, quoting Bededicta Ward.
[7] Barbara Brown Taylor, Gospel Medicine, Boston: Crowley Publications,1995
[8] Carl Jung
[9] Martin Luther King Jr.
[10] Lewis, C.S. "The perfect penitent." Mere Christianity. New York: Macmillian Paperbacks, 1960, 56-61.
[11] Norris, Kathleen. "Repentance." Amazing Grace: A Vocabulary of Faith. New York: Riverhead Books, 1998, 69-70.
[12] Here is a minor agreement between Matthew and Luke against Mark. Matthew 3.3 and Luke 3.4 omit the quotation from Malachi 3.1 in Mark 1.2. Both use the same reference elsewhere, in the same context of the double tradition (Matthew 11.10 = Luke 7.27).
[13] Martin Luther, Small Catechism.
[14] Barth Church Dogmatics IV.3 [72.4] 854.
good article. Question? According to the way you wrote this, regarding place and purpose of baptism, are you not talking about believer baptism rather than infant baptism? Observation: I just finished Stephen Hawking's last book the "Grand Design". He states that, how one observes things, at a quantum level, decides what they are. Observation can change their whole history. For example, a particle traveling in a straight line from many light years away, may be observed as a wave. That observation then changes the particles whole history. So that now it has always been a wave. Doesn't this strike you as a great picture of salvation repentance and baptism?. Once we are observed by God as being in Christ, our whole history changes and we have always been that way. (this might say something about election as well) -Lynn Eastman
ReplyDelete