Why was Jesus baptized?

Switch89
Posts: 67
Joined: 2007-09-13
User is offlineOffline
Why was Jesus baptized?

Why do the gospels record Jesus being baptized?

I mean, if baptism is for the remission of sins, why the heck would he need to be baptized? Is there some clever symbolism going on here or what?


I AM GOD AS YOU
Superfan
Posts: 4793
Joined: 2007-09-29
User is offlineOffline
I took a shower today .....

I took a shower today .....


Wonko
Wonko's picture
Posts: 518
Joined: 2008-06-18
User is offlineOffline
I AM GOD AS YOU wrote:I took

I AM GOD AS YOU wrote:

I took a shower today .....

I opened a hydrant only to have the 3" coupling I had just hooked up blow apart, drenching me in water today.... that should count for something too!

 

As to your question Switch, I've never understood that either. Perhaps an apologetic will be along shortly to, well,  apologize for the KJV lack of clarity....

 


jcgadfly
SuperfanBronze Member
Posts: 6789
Joined: 2006-07-18
User is offlineOffline
It is a rather nice literary

It is a rather nice literary set-up. It was a torch-passing ceremony - fiction's full of them.

"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin


MattShizzle
Posts: 7966
Joined: 2006-03-31
User is offlineOffline
More than likely it was left

More than likely it was left from one of the earlier myths Jesus was copied from, and they didn't realize at the time it didn't make sense for God to have to forgive himself for sinning against himself.

Matt Shizzle has been banned from the Rational Response Squad website. This event shall provide an atmosphere more conducive to social growth. - Majority of the mod team


Rook_Hawkins
RRS CO-FOUNDER
Rook_Hawkins's picture
Posts: 1322
Joined: 2006-02-11
User is offlineOffline
Water in jewish literature

Water in jewish literature is used often.  It's a literary trope, like the red sea parting, or the flood of Noah, or Jonah and the whale, or the water from the rock.  But it is a double entendre in Mark, i.e. a means of becoming "wetted" (christus) (anointed).  Jesus is "wetted" by John the Baptist.  Mark clues us in when he says that "John appeared, baptizing in the wilderness and proclaiming a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins."  When he baptised Jesus, Isaiah's Son of Man, it became about forgiveness of sins, because that was the mission of Jesus. 

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server, which houses Celebrity Atheists. Books by Rook Hawkins (Thomas Verenna)


Switch89
Posts: 67
Joined: 2007-09-13
User is offlineOffline
Oil?

I thought anointing, in a jewish context, implied that oil was used. Anyway, I'm not quite following your explanation, could you expound a little?


Rook_Hawkins
RRS CO-FOUNDER
Rook_Hawkins's picture
Posts: 1322
Joined: 2006-02-11
User is offlineOffline
Switch89 wrote:I thought

Switch89 wrote:

I thought anointing, in a jewish context, implied that oil was used.

What makes you think that there was only one Jewish context?

Quote:
Anyway, I'm not quite following your explanation, could you expound a little?

What do you need me to explain?

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server, which houses Celebrity Atheists. Books by Rook Hawkins (Thomas Verenna)


Switch89
Posts: 67
Joined: 2007-09-13
User is offlineOffline
Well, how exactly is the

Well, how exactly is the baptism connected to the flood? What is the theme going on there? I can understand how one could claim that baptism washes away man's sin and that this parallels god's "baptism" of the earth in a flood to cleanse it of sinful people.

 

But Jesus wasn't supposed to have sinned according to the gospels.

I have only heard of annointing to mean with oil, but I could be wrong. I've got out my strong's exhaustive and haven't seen any different there. Could you please provide an example or two of annointings done with water rather than oil?


I AM GOD AS YOU
Superfan
Posts: 4793
Joined: 2007-09-29
User is offlineOffline
WHY ??? Just ceurious of why

WHY ??? Just curious of why one would care ???


Switch89
Posts: 67
Joined: 2007-09-13
User is offlineOffline
IAGAY:I'm having a debate

IAGAY:

I'm having a debate with a theist on my blog and he thinks that Jesus was a historical person. He cites the baptism of Jesus as fulfilling the principal of embarassment (Why would someone report Jesus as being baptized, implying he was a sinner, unless it was true?).


I AM GOD AS YOU
Superfan
Posts: 4793
Joined: 2007-09-29
User is offlineOffline
Fantasy, as is all idol

Fantasy, is all idol wishful worship, of all religion is silly .... as I ask WTF isn't god? As if anything is separate ....  Religion shit is fucking stupid , period. Ridiculous it is.

  Yeah , talking to the idol worshipers is frustrating, but keep on trying.

   Folklore is nuts. People are nuts , obviously ....  this sad day .... ouch


Cali_Athiest2
Cali_Athiest2's picture
Posts: 440
Joined: 2008-02-07
User is offlineOffline
First one has to understand

First one has to understand what baptism is. Personally, I always thought there was some mystical point behind it, but it is just a symbolic gesture. So what is the point of being baptised for anyone?

"Always seek out the truth, but avoid at all costs those that claim to have found it" ANONYMOUS


zarathustra
atheist
zarathustra's picture
Posts: 1211
Joined: 2006-11-16
User is onlineOnline
While we're at it, why was

While we're at it, why was jesus circumcised?  If he was perfect, wouldn't he have been born without the offending flap?

There are no theists on operating tables.

πππ†
π†††


I AM GOD AS YOU
Superfan
Posts: 4793
Joined: 2007-09-29
User is offlineOffline
Yeah , good question

Yeah , good question zarathustra... 


Switch89
Posts: 67
Joined: 2007-09-13
User is offlineOffline
It is supposed to be

It is supposed to be symbolic of washing away sins.

Z, I think Christians generally interpret Jesus' circumcision as being required by the Jewish Law at that time. 


That_Guy
That_Guy's picture
Posts: 17
Joined: 2008-11-20
User is offlineOffline
Baptism

Actually, the idea of Baptism was completely foreign to Judaism.  There is however another tradition where baptism featured prominently, in the Isis/Osiris mystery cults of Egypt. The story of the baptism of Jesus by John was probably included because it was simply too well known in 1st and 2nd century Palestine to be left out. To understand where it comes from it is necessary to understand that Jesus was probably not Jewish at all (at least not religiously Jewish). There are literally hundreds of different lines of evidence that indicate that John the Baptist was not the forerunner to Jesus, but was in fact his greatest rival, and that BOTH of them were actually spreading a Mystery Cult with its roots in Egypt. Jesus was baptized as part of his initiation in to JOHN'S cult, and then later split to form his own group. There is lots of evidence that there was a rival church that considered John to be the Messiah and that this tradition survived in various secret societies until the present day. What we know as the 'Christian Church' was founded by the people who followed Jesus, but were not a member of his 'inner circle'. They interpreted his words and actions through a Jewish lens, but never really understood what it was he was teaching. Two books that explore this theme are The Templar Revelations and Jesus the Magician. I highly recommend them both.


quest
Posts: 4
Joined: 2008-12-21
User is offlineOffline
Purpose of Baptism

I was taught as a child in the Assembly Of God Church that the baptism (full immersion) was to cleanse the spirit (it seems spirits do not like water). When the cleansed body comes out of the water the Holy Spirit will then enter the body. Thus after Jesus was baptized the spirit descended on him like a dove. It was not until after the Holy Spirit was on Jesus that he could perform miracles and had the full knowledge of God.

 

That is the teaching as I remember it.

 

Nothing does not exist.


Helluvaguy
Posts: 2
Joined: 2008-12-27
User is offlineOffline
Yes, Jesus was baptised but

Yes, Jesus was baptised but no, it was not for the forgiveness of sins.  John the Baptist even said Jesus had no business coming to him for a baptism of repentence.  Jesus said he was coming to fulfil righteousness or justice which probably, to him,  meant some step of obedience to God.  There are some other possibilites as well.  Theologically, as Israel crossed the Jordon to the Promised Land, Jesus entered the Jordan and exited as the New Israel.  He would fulfill the law that the old Israel had failed to do.  And then there is the idea of his baptism being an identification with this new group of baptized people who were now following a new path.


Helluvaguy
Posts: 2
Joined: 2008-12-27
User is offlineOffline
Jesus' Baptism

Yes, Jesus was baptised but no, it was not for the forgiveness of sins.  John the Baptist even said Jesus had no business coming to him for a baptism of repentence.  Jesus said he was coming to fulfil righteousness or justice which probably, to him,  meant some step of obedience to God.  There are some other possibilites as well.  Theologically, as Israel crossed the Jordon to the Promised Land, Jesus entered the Jordan and exited as the New Israel.  He would fulfill the law that the old Israel had failed to do.  And then there is the idea of his baptism being an identification with this new group of baptized people who were now following a new path.


spin
spin's picture
Posts: 188
Joined: 2008-10-29
User is offlineOffline
Helluvaguy wrote:Yes, Jesus

Helluvaguy wrote:

Yes, Jesus was baptised but no, it was not for the forgiveness of sins. John the Baptist even said Jesus had no business coming to him for a baptism of repentence.


So far we are gospel.

Helluvaguy wrote:

Jesus said he was coming to fulfil righteousness or justice which probably, to him,  meant some step of obedience to God.


Not of course to himself, right?

Helluvaguy wrote:

There are some other possibilites as well.  Theologically, as Israel crossed the Jordon to the Promised Land, Jesus entered the Jordan and exited as the New Israel.


Somewhat overwrought. Jesus didn't "cross" the Jordan; he was merely moistened in it.

Helluvaguy wrote:

He would fulfill the law that the old Israel had failed to do.


The old christian anti-Jewish rhetoric oozes out. This is how christianity explains its cuckoo role: it is the real Israel, not the Jews. It belongs in the nest.

Helluvaguy wrote:

And then there is the idea of his baptism being an identification with this new group of baptized people who were now following a new path.


That was John's thing. John's messianism didn't need the false messiah, but christianity needed to explain baptism. It's only role in christianity is as an initiation ceremony. For John it marked the admittance into the end time. Earliest christianity accepted that end time until it was clear it wasn't coming as claimed, so baptism, which it was stuck with now -- Jesus was baptized --, needed to be accommodated: why this ceremonial act rather than another? John baptized Jesus, so, if it's good enough for him, it's good enough for you too.



spin

Trust the evidence, Luke


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13545
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Was Jesus Baptised? That is

Was Jesus Baptised?

That is like  5 year old asking a friend if they found the decoder ring in their Cracker Jack box.?

Baptised or not, what does that mean anyway? It is the same as Superman not getting to his lead tube before Lex Luthor hits him with Kriptonite.

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


PorkChop
Rational VIP!SuperfanSilver Member
Posts: 154
Joined: 2008-06-26
User is offlineOffline
spin wrote: moistenedGreat

spin wrote:

 moistened

Great word choice Eye-wink


I AM GOD AS YOU
Superfan
Posts: 4793
Joined: 2007-09-29
User is offlineOffline
Symbolism yeah. Every one

Symbolism yeah. Every one with any sense knows all saviours worth a hoot were baptized. Here's a few,

The World's Sixteen Crucified Saviors, by Kersey Graves, [1875]

THE HOLY GHOST OF ORIENTAL ORIGIN

http://www.sacred-texts.com/bib/cv/wscs/wscs27.htm

 

 


Rationale
Posts: 12
Joined: 2009-08-04
User is offlineOffline
In The Incredible Shrinking

In The Incredible Shrinking Son of Man, Bob Price states the case that there may be evidence to suggest that the point when Jesus became The Son of God was continually being brought forward. At first it was the resurrection when he became "adopted", then the baptism in the Jordan. At this point then, Jesus would just be another unwashed sinner who was in fact not yet the Son of God, but the adoption papers were about to be finalized as it were. This may be the significance of "this is my own beloved son with whom I am pleased" and the descent of the dove or spirit of God upon Jesus. An apotheosis.

 

Later it went all the way back to the virgin birth, of course as the story grew more fantastical over time.

 

Having John the Baptist feel unworthy to baptise Jesus also may be a nod to the followers of John the Baptist, a rival sect with great popularity who objected to following the upstart Jesus figure. By making John clearly subordinate to Jesus, it's establishing who the real big cheese is in the relationship and makes John a forerunner who is preparing the way for the REAL Christ.

 

What we're lacking of course is clear knowledge of the context of the time in terms of what groups were in play exactly and at precisely what time so we must theorize based on the evidences we have. I would say there's definitely enough evidence when taken together to form such a hypothesis.


Atheistextremist
atheistSilver Member
Atheistextremist's picture
Posts: 5095
Joined: 2009-09-17
User is offlineOffline
I think I AM said it best...

I AM GOD AS YOU wrote:

Religion shit is fucking stupid , period. Ridiculous it is.

"Experiments are the only means of knowledge at our disposal. The rest is poetry, imagination." Max Planck


iwbiek
atheistSuperfan
iwbiek's picture
Posts: 3283
Joined: 2008-03-23
User is offlineOffline
Atheistextremist wrote:I AM

Atheistextremist wrote:

I AM GOD AS YOU wrote:

Religion shit is fucking stupid , period. Ridiculous it is.

ah, my sweet travelling companion avalokitesvara, how i miss him!  as i sit here tonight getting stoned on czech beer and listening to neil young and crazy horse sing "sail away," i feel our anattas are in communion.  may we meet as fat, happy buddhas in that atheist pure land in the sky, drink cuban rum, and discuss alan watts.

"I asked my father,
I said, 'Father change my name.'
The one I'm using now it's covered up
with fear and filth and cowardice and shame."
--Leonard Cohen


Atheistextremist
atheistSilver Member
Atheistextremist's picture
Posts: 5095
Joined: 2009-09-17
User is offlineOffline
Lol - can non existent souls meet in the afterlife?

But I thought Avalokitesvara was a kind of celestial florence nightingale not a dude - am not that up on the eastern thing and of course Watts is a heretic according to my mother who pronounces these judgments as if his disbelief in her stuff puts the kybosh on anything he might have to say about everything. "But he's a heeratuc!" she wails in an odd mid-tasman accent.

I'd say my personal NY favourite is Down by the River, I also like Cowgirl and a bunch of other stuff I forget just now. Sugar Mountain - the fact it was written when NY was just a kid lends it a sort of glow. You observe and interpret when you're older but that song channels those pure moments of high wisdom you get in your teens.

I was in Havana about 6 weeks ago and it sounds like you'd really love it there. Sadly the food is terrible but there's something going on that's good - apart from all the brunette girls and the rum. It's a bit of a time capsule. 

Hope you don't have too big a headache, BTW.

 

 

 

 

"Experiments are the only means of knowledge at our disposal. The rest is poetry, imagination." Max Planck


iwbiek
atheistSuperfan
iwbiek's picture
Posts: 3283
Joined: 2008-03-23
User is offlineOffline
Atheistextremist wrote:But I

Atheistextremist wrote:

But I thought Avalokitesvara was a kind of celestial florence nightingale not a dude

depends on which part of asia you're in.  the original indian bodhisattva was male.  the dalai lama is supposedly his incarnation.  to the japanese, she's a goddess named kwannon.

regardless, it was my nickname for the late, great I AM GOD AS YOU and his american zen-style posts.  i think he would get a kick out of the fact that avalokitesvara has a female aspect.

Atheistextremist wrote:

I'd say my personal NY favourite is Down by the River, I also like Cowgirl and a bunch of other stuff I forget just now. Sugar Mountain - the fact it was written when NY was just a kid lends it a sort of glow. You observe and interpret when you're older but that song channels those pure moments of high wisdom you get in your teens.

i've always loved neil, though i've never become a serious collector of his albums.  to be honest, my absolute favorite thing he's ever done is his "silver and gold" album that came out in 2000.

Atheistextremist wrote:

I was in Havana about 6 weeks ago and it sounds like you'd really love it there.

i'm sure i would.  i'd love to find out, but our fucking retarded state department has a problem with that and could slap me with an insane fine, or even throw me in jail.

Atheistextremist wrote:

Hope you don't have too big a headache, BTW.

thanks for the good wishes, but no worries.  czech beer always treats me right.  obviously i'm still lucid and hangin' in there, though i'm about to go to bed just from being tired.

 

 

 

 

"I asked my father,
I said, 'Father change my name.'
The one I'm using now it's covered up
with fear and filth and cowardice and shame."
--Leonard Cohen


ProzacDeathWish
atheist
ProzacDeathWish's picture
Posts: 3614
Joined: 2007-12-02
User is offlineOffline
Switch89 wrote:Why do the

Switch89 wrote:

Why do the gospels record Jesus being baptized?

 

  Actually John was never able to baptize Jesus.  Every time Jesus attempted to immerse himself into the river all he could do instead was walk across its surface. Finally John just said to hell with it and gave up.  That's why many modern churches forgo baptism by immersion and instead just sprinkle holy water on top of the head.

I'm a right wing atheist because I enjoy being hated by everyone.

"The best government is a benevolent tyranny tempered by an occasional assassination." Voltaire ( 1694-1778 )


Atheistextremist
atheistSilver Member
Atheistextremist's picture
Posts: 5095
Joined: 2009-09-17
User is offlineOffline
Chuckle

ProzacDeathWish wrote:

Switch89 wrote:

Why do the gospels record Jesus being baptized?

 

  Actually John was never able to baptize Jesus.  Every time Jesus attempted to immerse himself into the river all he could do instead was walk across its surface. Finally John just said to hell with it and gave up.  That's why many modern churches forgo baptism by immersion and instead just sprinkle holy water on top of the head.

 

+1

 

"Experiments are the only means of knowledge at our disposal. The rest is poetry, imagination." Max Planck


ProzacDeathWish
atheist
ProzacDeathWish's picture
Posts: 3614
Joined: 2007-12-02
User is offlineOffline
Atheistextremist

Atheistextremist wrote:

+1

 

   +1  = ?


Atheistextremist
atheistSilver Member
Atheistextremist's picture
Posts: 5095
Joined: 2009-09-17
User is offlineOffline
I totally agree

 

Add mine to that opinion, etc

 

 

 

 

"Experiments are the only means of knowledge at our disposal. The rest is poetry, imagination." Max Planck


Dragoon
Dragoon's picture
Posts: 170
Joined: 2009-05-27
User is offlineOffline
Why oh why...

Good question really. I'd never really thought about Jesus' baptism in that context before.

 

Jesus says to John that he should be baptized by him because, "it is proper for us to do this to fulfill all righteousness" (Matthew 3:15)

 

OK, so what 'righteousness' requirements might that be? My thoughts (please feel free to correct/comment, as I haven't really given this a lot of thought before now);

1) Jesus had been prophesied as coming as the Messiah/King. John was preaching and preparing the way for the Messiah. By anointing Jesus with water, and affirming that he was the promised 'Lamb of God' (see John 1:29-), John gives Jesus his public stamp of authority. 

2) Though John says that he is not fit to tie the sandals of Jesus, Jesus demonstrates humility in this. Though he was in very nature God, he did not consider equality with God something to be grasped, but made himself nothing, taking the very nature of a servant.

3) Christians are to follow Jesus' example. He was both baptized with water by John, and we are told that the Holy Spirit descended on him at this time. 

 

 


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13545
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Rook_Hawkins wrote:Switch89

Rook_Hawkins wrote:

Switch89 wrote:

I thought anointing, in a jewish context, implied that oil was used.

What makes you think that there was only one Jewish context?

Quote:
Anyway, I'm not quite following your explanation, could you expound a little?

What do you need me to explain?

Rook, how's it going? Miss you guy!

I am glad there are historians like you to answer these questions. But to me, what does the price of tea in China have to do with virgin births and surviving rigor mortis? I am a real person. Lamborghini's are real, but that doesn't mean that I can fart one out of my ass, and my ass is real too.

Was Jesus "Baptized" is meaningless. Dipping someone in water only proves you dipped them in water. It doesn't prove that an invisible super brain is floating out in the cosmos interfering in human affairs.

I am merely complementing you on your patience. I have none. How you deal with these questions on a daily basis says a lot about your patience with people.

It is great to see you posting and we do need your historical knowledge. Weapons like yours are needed in our superstitious world. It is not enough to merely state the obvious, slow deconstruction is often need to get people to realize my short route. Some people need the long road, before they see the light.

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


1 Timothy 1 13 17
Posts: 19
Joined: 2010-08-12
User is offlineOffline
baptizing jesus

John baptized with water because it was unkown to him who christ was but was said for him to prepare followers for the coming of christ which would be made known to him through baptizim of christ with water when this happened a dove came to jesus and a voice from the heavens spoke "THIS IS MY SON AND I AM PLEASED WITH HIM" the use of water is symbolic of when the earth was flooded in noahs time showing a start anew theme we get baptized still today as a comitment to GOD it says we believe we were washed white by the blood of the lamb and now give our will to the LORD JESUS CHRIST for we are all sinners and are only fit to serve when clean of sin. 


mellestad
Moderator
Posts: 2927
Joined: 2009-08-19
User is offlineOffline
Praise Jesus. 

Praise Jesus.

 

Everything makes more sense now that I've stopped believing.


Anonymous45345345 (not verified)
Posts: 4294964979
Joined: 1969-12-31
User is offlineOffline
LMAO

ProzacDeathWish wrote:

Switch89 wrote:

Why do the gospels record Jesus being baptized?

 

  Actually John was never able to baptize Jesus.  Every time Jesus attempted to immerse himself into the river all he could do instead was walk across its surface. Finally John just said to hell with it and gave up.  That's why many modern churches forgo baptism by immersion and instead just sprinkle holy water on top of the head.

 

LMAO


TGBaker
atheist
TGBaker's picture
Posts: 1367
Joined: 2011-02-06
User is offlineOffline
Switch89 wrote:Why do the

Switch89 wrote:

Why do the gospels record Jesus being baptized?

I mean, if baptism is for the remission of sins, why the heck would he need to be baptized? Is there some clever symbolism going on here or what?

 

Jesus was baptised for the remission of sin in Mark. Matthew and Luke adding  the infancy narratives readact that section from Mark and remove it. In Mark Jesus receives the holy spirit after baptism. The Greek preposition is eis meaning "into."  The spirit enters into him.  With the creation of the virgin birth myth Jesus is begotten by holy spirit and therefore has it from birth.  The baptism is reworked into a confirmation in Matthew and Luke by this. The gospel of John drops the issue.  The theological reworking seems to indicate that Jesus was a follower of John the Baptist and did not begin his on program until John was arrested.

"You can't write a chord ugly enough to say what you want to say sometimes, so you have to rely on a giraffe filled with whip cream."--Frank Zappa

http://atheisticgod.blogspot.com/ Books on atheism


ApostateAbe
ApostateAbe's picture
Posts: 64
Joined: 2011-04-04
User is offlineOffline
Switch89 wrote:Why do the

Switch89 wrote:

Why do the gospels record Jesus being baptized?

I mean, if baptism is for the remission of sins, why the heck would he need to be baptized? Is there some clever symbolism going on here or what?

This is actually a very worthy question, and it has been an essential one in critical New Testament scholarship.  The basic conclusion among critical scholars has been that the synoptic gospels record that Jesus was baptized primarily because Jesus really was baptized by John the Baptist, and the doctrine that Jesus was sinless was only a later development that didn't exactly jive with the well-known fact that Jesus was baptized.  The gospel authors themselves realized the problem. 

Matthew 3:13-14

Then Jesus came from Galilee to John at the Jordan, to be baptized by him. John would have prevented him, saying, ‘I need to be baptized by you, and do you come to me?’ But Jesus answered him, ‘Let it be so now; for it is proper for us in this way to fulfil all righteousness.’

Seems like Jesus had a flimsy explanation, right?  Does Jesus really need to be baptized to "fulfil all righteousness"? 

The gospel authors seem to be haunted by the problem of baptism, and the washing of sin problem was not their biggest concern.  There was an even bigger problem: Christianity in the first century competed strongly with the cult of John the Baptist for adherents.  The cult of John the Baptist in the first century was possibly more popular than Christianity, at least among the Jews.  The historian Josephus spent twice as much space writing about John the Baptist than he did writing about Jesus.  The followers of John the Baptist would remind Christians every day that "Jesus was baptized by John.  So who is sinless?"  Christians, therefore, made the very best of this otherwise embarrassing reality in their own accounts.  In the Christian gospels,

  • John the Baptist is consistently presented as the most reverent and humble character with respect to Jesus, showering Jesus with praise at his own expense. He is quoted as saying, for example, "I am not worthy to carry his sandals."  (Matthew 3:11)
  • In the gospels of Matthew and Mark, after Jesus is baptized, the Spirit of God alights on Jesus (not John), and God himself speaks from the heavens, "This is my Son, the Beloved, with whom I am well pleased," in the presence of John the Baptist. (Matthew 3:17)
  • In the gospel of Luke, John is sent to prison, and only after that is the baptism of Jesus mentioned (the baptizer being someone anonymous).
  • In the gospel of John (the latest canonical gospel), John the Baptist has a prominent role, but the account of the baptism of Jesus is completely omitted!

So, the evidence strongly suggests that Jesus really was baptized by John the Baptist.  That still leaves the question: why?  Well, the most plausible explanation is that Jesus started out as a follower of John the Baptist.  Jesus adopted the doctrines and practices of John the Baptist, including at least the apocalyptism, the emphasis on the poor, and the practice of baptism for the cleansing of sin.  So, that is what critical scholars tend to believe.


TGBaker
atheist
TGBaker's picture
Posts: 1367
Joined: 2011-02-06
User is offlineOffline
ApostateAbe wrote:Switch89

ApostateAbe wrote:

Switch89 wrote:

Why do the gospels record Jesus being baptized?

I mean, if baptism is for the remission of sins, why the heck would he need to be baptized? Is there some clever symbolism going on here or what?

This is actually a very worthy question, and it has been an essential one in critical New Testament scholarship.  The basic conclusion among critical scholars has been that the synoptic gospels record that Jesus was baptized primarily because Jesus really was baptized by John the Baptist, and the doctrine that Jesus was sinless was only a later development that didn't exactly jive with the well-known fact that Jesus was baptized.  The gospel authors themselves realized the problem. 

Matthew 3:13-14

Then Jesus came from Galilee to John at the Jordan, to be baptized by him. John would have prevented him, saying, ‘I need to be baptized by you, and do you come to me?’ But Jesus answered him, ‘Let it be so now; for it is proper for us in this way to fulfil all righteousness.’

Seems like Jesus had a flimsy explanation, right?  Does Jesus really need to be baptized to "fulfil all righteousness"? 

The gospel authors seem to be haunted by the problem of baptism, and the washing of sin problem was not their biggest concern.  There was an even bigger problem: Christianity in the first century competed strongly with the cult of John the Baptist for adherents.  The cult of John the Baptist in the first century was possibly more popular than Christianity, at least among the Jews.  The historian Josephus spent twice as much space writing about John the Baptist than he did writing about Jesus.  The followers of John the Baptist would remind Christians every day that "Jesus was baptized by John.  So who is sinless?"  Christians, therefore, made the very best of this otherwise embarrassing reality in their own accounts.  In the Christian gospels,

  • John the Baptist is consistently presented as the most reverent and humble character with respect to Jesus, showering Jesus with praise at his own expense. He is quoted as saying, for example, "I am not worthy to carry his sandals."  (Matthew 3:11)
  • In the gospels of Matthew and Mark, after Jesus is baptized, the Spirit of God alights on Jesus (not John), and God himself speaks from the heavens, "This is my Son, the Beloved, with whom I am well pleased," in the presence of John the Baptist. (Matthew 3:17)
  • In the gospel of Luke, John is sent to prison, and only after that is the baptism of Jesus mentioned (the baptizer being someone anonymous).
  • In the gospel of John (the latest canonical gospel), John the Baptist has a prominent role, but the account of the baptism of Jesus is completely omitted!

So, the evidence strongly suggests that Jesus really was baptized by John the Baptist.  That still leaves the question: why?  Well, the most plausible explanation is that Jesus started out as a follower of John the Baptist.  Jesus adopted the doctrines and practices of John the Baptist, including at least the apocalyptism, the emphasis on the poor, and the practice of baptism for the cleansing of sin.  So, that is what critical scholars tend to believe.

Very good presentation. I think that it is important that the Markan version still shows teh receiving of the holy spirit by Jesus after baptism a doctrine found in Acts 2:38 for sinners.  The preposition "eis" literally means into which is changed by Matthew and Luke to imply that the spirit comes to rest on Jesus rather than indwell.  It is a good indication that Mark had an adoptionist Christology reflected in some passages of Paul. This in itself shows that at least a type of Christianity saw Jesus simply as a man chosen as a prophet or a messiah not as a divine figure. 

"You can't write a chord ugly enough to say what you want to say sometimes, so you have to rely on a giraffe filled with whip cream."--Frank Zappa

http://atheisticgod.blogspot.com/ Books on atheism


robj101
atheist
robj101's picture
Posts: 2481
Joined: 2010-02-20
User is offlineOffline
It's symbolic, jesus was

It's symbolic, jesus was willing to be baptized along with his followers. Pretty simple really but this is just my opinion.

"You men get ready we are going in, I will lead the charge"

Faith is the word but next to that snugged up closely "lie's" the want.
"By simple common sense I don't believe in god, in none."-Charlie Chaplin


TGBaker
atheist
TGBaker's picture
Posts: 1367
Joined: 2011-02-06
User is offlineOffline
robj101 wrote:It's symbolic,

robj101 wrote:

It's symbolic, jesus was willing to be baptized along with his followers. Pretty simple really but this is just my opinion.

"You men get ready we are going in, I will lead the charge"

No we can tell by the reconstruction of the three gospels that it was a problem that the church was  trying to overcome once Jesus was recast as sinless. That is part of the reason for the two attempts at creating infancy narrative. Jesus was  baptized for sin and received the holy spirit. A practice of John the Baptist. This was incorporated by the early church or Jesus himself.  At the time he was baptized he was a follower of the Baptist. The idea that he was to do it to fulfill righteousness was a secondary apology found in Matthew and Luke as they try to rework the earlier scandal in Mark.  The symbolic view is a contemporary apology by orthodoxy that did not exist in the first century.

"You can't write a chord ugly enough to say what you want to say sometimes, so you have to rely on a giraffe filled with whip cream."--Frank Zappa

http://atheisticgod.blogspot.com/ Books on atheism


robj101
atheist
robj101's picture
Posts: 2481
Joined: 2010-02-20
User is offlineOffline
TGBaker wrote:robj101

TGBaker wrote:

robj101 wrote:

It's symbolic, jesus was willing to be baptized along with his followers. Pretty simple really but this is just my opinion.

"You men get ready we are going in, I will lead the charge"

No we can tell by the reconstruction of the three gospels that it was a problem that the church was  trying to overcome once Jesus was recast as sinless. That is part of the reason for the two attempts at creating infancy narrative. Jesus was  baptized for sin and received the holy spirit. A practice of John the Baptist. This was incorporated by the early church or Jesus himself.  At the time he was baptized he was a follower of the Baptist. The idea that he was to do it to fulfill righteousness was a secondary apology found in Matthew and Luke as they try to rework the earlier scandal in Mark.  The symbolic view is a contemporary apology by orthodoxy that did not exist in the first century.

I know, I'm just thinking and commenting as I feel a nowdays theist would.

Faith is the word but next to that snugged up closely "lie's" the want.
"By simple common sense I don't believe in god, in none."-Charlie Chaplin


TGBaker
atheist
TGBaker's picture
Posts: 1367
Joined: 2011-02-06
User is offlineOffline
robj101 wrote:TGBaker

robj101 wrote:

TGBaker wrote:

robj101 wrote:

It's symbolic, jesus was willing to be baptized along with his followers. Pretty simple really but this is just my opinion.

"You men get ready we are going in, I will lead the charge"

No we can tell by the reconstruction of the three gospels that it was a problem that the church was  trying to overcome once Jesus was recast as sinless. That is part of the reason for the two attempts at creating infancy narrative. Jesus was  baptized for sin and received the holy spirit. A practice of John the Baptist. This was incorporated by the early church or Jesus himself.  At the time he was baptized he was a follower of the Baptist. The idea that he was to do it to fulfill righteousness was a secondary apology found in Matthew and Luke as they try to rework the earlier scandal in Mark.  The symbolic view is a contemporary apology by orthodoxy that did not exist in the first century.

I know, I'm just thinking and commenting as I feel a nowdays theist would.

That is exactly the way they do it.  Mark still bothers  Christian conservative Greek professors when they see the language and its implication.

"You can't write a chord ugly enough to say what you want to say sometimes, so you have to rely on a giraffe filled with whip cream."--Frank Zappa

http://atheisticgod.blogspot.com/ Books on atheism