Matthew 3 John the Baptist

[hotcoffee]

Matthew 3

New International Version (NIV)


John the Baptist Prepares the Way

3 In those days John the Baptist came, preaching in the wilderness of Judea 2 and saying, “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven has come near.” 3 This is he who was spoken of through the prophet Isaiah:


“A voice of one calling in the wilderness,
‘Prepare the way for the Lord,
make straight paths for him.’”[a]

4 John’s clothes were made of camel’s hair, and he had a leather belt around his waist. His food was locusts and wild honey. 5 People went out to him from Jerusalem and all Judea and the whole region of the Jordan. 6 Confessing their sins, they were baptized by him in the Jordan River.

7 But when he saw many of the Pharisees and Sadducees coming to where he was baptizing, he said to them: “You brood of vipers! Who warned you to flee from the coming wrath? 8 Produce fruit in keeping with repentance. 9 And do not think you can say to yourselves, ‘We have Abraham as our father.’ I tell you that out of these stones God can raise up children for Abraham. 10 The ax is already at the root of the trees, and every tree that does not produce good fruit will be cut down and thrown into the fire.

11 “I baptize you with[b] water for repentance. But after me comes one who is more powerful than I, whose sandals I am not worthy to carry. He will baptize you with[c] the Holy Spirit and fire. 12 His winnowing fork is in his hand, and he will clear his threshing floor, gathering his wheat into the barn and burning up the chaff with unquenchable fire.”

The Baptism of Jesus

13 Then Jesus came from Galilee to the Jordan to be baptized by John. 14 But John tried to deter him, saying, “I need to be baptized by you, and do you come to me?”

15 Jesus replied, “Let it be so now; it is proper for us to do this to fulfill all righteousness.” Then John consented.

16 As soon as Jesus was baptized, he went up out of the water. At that moment heaven was opened, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove and alighting on him. 17 And a voice from heaven said, “This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased.”


Footnotes:
a.Matthew 3:3 Isaiah 40:3
b.Matthew 3:11 Or in
c.Matthew 3:11 Or in


Isaiah 40:3

New International Version (NIV)



3 A voice of one calling:
“In the wilderness prepare
the way for the Lord[a];
make straight in the desert
a highway for our God.[b]


Footnotes:
a.Isaiah 40:3 Or A voice of one calling in the wilderness: / “Prepare the way for the Lord
b.Isaiah 40:3 Hebrew; Septuagint make straight the paths of our God

[Radiant1]

[3:1] Unlike Luke, Matthew says nothing of the Baptist’s origins and does not make him a relative of Jesus. The desert of Judea: the barren region west of the Dead Sea extending up the Jordan valley.

[3:1–12] Here Matthew takes up the order of Jesus’ ministry found in the gospel of Mark, beginning with the preparatory preaching of John the Baptist.

[3:2] Repent: the Baptist calls for a change of heart and conduct, a turning of one’s life from rebellion to obedience towards God. The kingdom of heaven is at hand: “heaven” (lit., “the heavens”) is a substitute for the name “God” that was avoided by devout Jews of the time out of reverence. The expression “the kingdom of heaven” occurs only in the gospel of Matthew. It means the effective rule of God over his people. In its fullness it includes not only human obedience to God’s word, but the triumph of God over physical evils, supremely over death. In the expectation found in Jewish apocalyptic, the kingdom was to be ushered in by a judgment in which sinners would be condemned and perish, an expectation shared by the Baptist. This was modified in Christian understanding where the kingdom was seen as being established in stages, culminating with the parousia of Jesus.

[3:3] See note on Jn 1:23.

[3:4] The clothing of John recalls the austere dress of the prophet Elijah (2 Kgs 1:8). The expectation of the return of Elijah from heaven to prepare Israel for the final manifestation of God’s kingdom was widespread, and according to Matthew this expectation was fulfilled in the Baptist’s ministry (Mt 11:14; 17:11–13).

[3:6] Ritual washing was practiced by various groups in Palestine between 150 B.C. and A.D. 250. John’s baptism may have been related to the purificatory washings of the Essenes at Qumran.

[3:7] Pharisees and Sadducees: the former were marked by devotion to the law, written and oral, and the scribes, experts in the law, belonged predominantly to this group. The Sadducees were the priestly aristocratic party, centered in Jerusalem. They accepted as scripture only the first five books of the Old Testament, followed only the letter of the law, rejected the oral legal traditions, and were opposed to teachings not found in the Pentateuch, such as the resurrection of the dead. Matthew links both of these groups together as enemies of Jesus (Mt 16:1, 6, 11, 12; cf. Mk 8:11–13, 15). The threatening words that follow are addressed to them rather than to “the crowds” as in Lk 3:7. The coming wrath: the judgment that will bring about the destruction of unrepentant sinners.

[3:11] Baptize you with the holy Spirit and fire: the water baptism of John will be followed by an “immersion” of the repentant in the cleansing power of the Spirit of God, and of the unrepentant in the destroying power of God’s judgment. However, some see the holy Spirit and fire as synonymous, and the effect of this “baptism” as either purification or destruction. See note on Lk 3:16.

[3:12] The discrimination between the good and the bad is compared to the procedure by which a farmer separates wheat and chaff. The winnowing fan was a forklike shovel with which the threshed wheat was thrown into the air. The kernels fell to the ground; the light chaff, blown off by the wind, was gathered and burned up.

[3:13–17] The baptism of Jesus is the occasion on which he is equipped for his ministry by the holy Spirit and proclaimed to be the Son of God.

[3:14–15] This dialogue, peculiar to Matthew, reveals John’s awareness of Jesus’ superiority to him as the mightier one who is coming and who will baptize with the holy Spirit (Mt 3:11). His reluctance to admit Jesus among the sinners whom he is baptizing with water is overcome by Jesus’ response. To fulfill all righteousness: in this gospel to fulfill usually refers to fulfillment of prophecy, and righteousness to moral conduct in conformity with God’s will. Here, however, as in Mt 5:6; 6:33, righteousness seems to mean the saving activity of God. To fulfill all righteousness is to submit to the plan of God for the salvation of the human race. This involves Jesus’ identification with sinners; hence the propriety of his accepting John’s baptism.

[3:16] The Spirit…coming upon him: cf. Is 42:1.

[3:17] This is my beloved Son: the Marcan address to Jesus (Mk 1:11) is changed into a proclamation. The Father’s voice speaks in terms that reflect Is 42:1; Ps 2:7; Gn 22:2.

a. [3:1–12] Mk 1:2–8; Lk 3:2–17.

b. [3:2] 4:17; 10:7.

c. [3:3] Is 40:3.

d. [3:4] 11:7–8; 2 Kgs 1:8; Zec 13:4.

e. [3:7] 12:34; 23:33; Is 59:5.

f. [3:9] Jn 8:33, 39; Rom 9:7–8; Gal 4:21–31.

g. [3:11] Jn 1:26–27, 33; Acts 1:5.

h. [3:12] 13:30; Is 41:16; Jer 15:7.

i. [3:13–17] Mk 1:9–11; Lk 3:21–22; Jn 1:31–34.

j. [3:16] Is 42:1.

k. [3:17] 12:18; 17:5; Gn 22:2; Ps 2:7; Is 42:1.

New American Bible Copyright © 1991, 1986, 1970 Confraternity of Christian Doctrine, Inc., Washington, DC. All rights reserved.

[hotcoffee]

So as I understand the third chapter....

John the Baptist was not a self indulgent person. He ate what clean food that was readily available in the desert and dressed as not to impress.

He preached "repent" and talked about the coming of the Messiah. That was his mission.

The reason he wouldn't baptize the Pharisees and the Sadducees was because he didn't see them as ready to repent. They were more interested in legalities, politics and money.

John also talked about God's Kingdom.... as will Jesus as we read on.

The Baptism in water was [and is today] a symbol of drowning [or death] of the old ways and a rebirth in repentance. The Baptism of fire that John talks about and the winnowing of the fork refer to the judgment to come.

When Jesus is baptized it is the beginning of his ministry.

It's important to note here that John didn't want to Baptize Jesus, but he wanted Jesus to Baptize him. That says to me that John knew that Jesus had done nothing to repent for. Jesus told John that He had to be Baptized to fulfill all righteousness. Jesus is saying here that he is identifying Himself with man, taking on all of man's sins and failure.

In verses 16 & 17 we see all three persons of the trinity. There is Jesus, the Holy Spirit [the dove] and God... who says He is Pleased with Jesus His Son.

Since Matthew is trying to prove that Jesus is indeed the Messiah.... it's not really important that he doesn't note the heredity of John the Baptist. John is important in this book because he helps Jesus begin the mission he has been preaching about along the River Jordan.

[Radiant1]

Agreed. I'd like to add some thoughts though.

As I understand it, it was not customary for Jews to start their office of priesthood until their 30th year. This is why Jesus' ministry didn't begin until He was 30 years old.

"The Kingdom of Heaven" had not been previously used in scripture, so Matthew is introducing a new phrase.

I rather like the comparison of John the Baptist with Elijah. Not only did the Jews believe Elijah would return to herald the coming of the Messiah, but Elijah preached deliverance. Judging by his clothes and manner of living John was likely an erumite or ascetic, something I can appreciate even though I don't live that lifestyle myself. The camel's hair was likely a form of penance, like sakcloth. The hairs would poke into his body, and the girdle around his loins would have pushed that against his flesh even further.

John the Baptist's comment about not being worthy to carry Jesus' sandals harkens back to that age when a slave would carry the sandals of his/her master, so it's completley appropriate of course.

Baptism of fire is interesting, it could mean various things; however, I'm not sure that it's a direct reference to the final judgment but rather the metanoia that many Christians experience (what Protestants would call "born again"). The Holy Spirit is often associated with fire (Acts 2:1-4, 1Cor 3:11-15) and the seraphim (the angels who constantly look up on the face of God) are described as fire. Jesus told the apostles that they would be baptising with the Holy Spirit after He ascended into Heaven and the tongues of fire came to rest upon them at Pentecost, so I think there's a correlation there.

[hotcoffee]

Originally Posted by Radiant1

Agreed. I'd like to add some thoughts though.

Baptism of fire is interesting, it could mean various things; however, I'm not sure that it's a direct reference to the final judgment but rather the metanoia that many Christians experience (what Protestants would call "born again"). The Holy Spirit is often associated with fire (Acts 2:1-4, 1Cor 3:11-15) and the seraphim (the angels who constantly look up on the face of God) are described as fire. Jesus told the apostles that they would be baptising with the Holy Spirit after He ascended into Heaven and the tongues of fire came to rest upon them at Pentecost, so I think there's a correlation there.

For the laymen out there metanoia is transformation change of heart.

Now Radiant1 we are in my territory. I've been a Baptist all my life so John the Baptist is definitely a favorite character of mine.

We use baptism by emersion. This is what John would have used and what Jesus would have experienced. It's not at all like a sprinkling on the top of the head.

Let's look at Baptism itself. It had definitely changed over the years with liability issues and the "dunking booth" built into so many Baptist churches. Don't get me wrong here.... even in the church service it's a real life changing experience.

Baptism by emersion in water is symbolic of allowing Jesus to take control, letting the old self die, washing away the sins, and beginning life anew.

Jesus would have walked out into the Jordan River. They would have been in water at least waist high. John would have taken control of Jesus. He would have taken Jesus backwards into the river pushing him completely into the water. The Messiah's feet might have left their footing. [Drowning is definitely a fear when you loose your footing and someone else is in control of your body.] When pulled back up, Jesus would have felt a rush of the water washing over him. That first breath would have been exhilarating.

My mother and I were both Baptized in a church in Connecticut when I was about 12 years old. My mother actually took in some water and choked coming out of the water. I remember a tingling feeling that lasted for days and a desire to do whatever I could to learn more about the Messiah.

Then there are the people around you. Baptism is not a solo act. At least one person [the dunker] is there when you are taking this life changing symbolic step. When Jesus was baptized there were people there who saw the whole thing. In my case the church was full and at the bay there were a couple dozen people. They are your witness. Christians who witness a baptism feel the real desire to celebrate.

I had the opportunity to be baptized in the Chesapeake Bay a few years ago. Although I wrestled with the idea of being Baptized twice, I decided to go ahead with it. I wanted to feel the sensation of a natural baptism by emersion the way Jesus would have felt it. It is indeed different that being baptized in a dunking booth.

Baptism by Fire is quite a different thing altogether. Look at who John was talking to. There would be a mixture of people. There would be those who had repented and they were there to be baptized. There would be the curious and those who meant to shut that crazy man John down.

IMHO when John was talking about Baptism by fire he was talking to those who were not yet believers. It was an alter call.

Remember too that John was called by God to complete this mission. He would have been speaking for God and His words would have come from God. Later in the gospels we will see that John knew who Jesus was even when he was in the womb. I just don't want us to get ahead of ourselves.

The word fire is mentioned three times. We find it in verses 10, 11, and 12. In my reading, I've noticed that when something is really important it is repeated in the Bible 3 times. Verses 10 and 12 definitely talk about fire that is destructive. To me that just says judgment and punishment.

And... I have to say that I think the Holy Spirit of the Pentecost is a lot different than the Holy Spirit after repentance. We'll probably see that a lot clearer after going through the gospels chapter by chapter.

[migtig]

Baptism by Fire seems to be connectable through the OT and NT.

Ezekiel 22:18-20
Son of man, the house of Israel has become dross to Me; they are all bronze, tin, iron, and lead, in the midst of a furnace; they have become dross from silver.

Therefore thus says the Lord G-d: 'Because you have all become dross, therefore behold, I will gather you into the midst of Jerusalem. As men gather silver, bronze, iron, lead, and tin into the midst of a furnace, to blow fire on it, to melt it; so I will gather you in My anger and in My fury, and I will leave you there and melt you. Yes, I will gather you and blow on you with the fire of My wrath, and you shall be melted in its midst .

Malachi 4:1:
For behold, the day is coming, burning like an oven. And all the proud, yes, all who do wickedly will be chaff. And the day which is coming shall burn them up," says the Lord of hosts

Then take the NT:
Matthew 13:38-42
The field is the world, the good seeds are the sons of the kingdom, but the chaff are the sons of the wicked one. The enemy who sowed them is the devil, the harvest is the end of the age, and the reapers are the angels. Therefore as the chaff are gathered and burned in the fire, so it will be at the end of this age. The Son of Man will send out His angels, and they will gather out of His kingdom (purge His floor) all things that offend, and those who practice lawlessness, and will cast them into the furnace.

[Radiant1]

Originally Posted by hotcoffee

For the laymen out there metanoia is transformation change of heart.

Now Radiant1 we are in my territory. I've been a Baptist all my life so John the Baptist is definitely a favorite character of mine.

We use baptism by emersion. This is what John would have used and what Jesus would have experienced. It's not at all like a sprinkling on the top of the head.

Let's look at Baptism itself. It had definitely changed over the years with liability issues and the "dunking booth" built into so many Baptist churches. Don't get me wrong here.... even in the church service it's a real life changing experience.

Baptism by emersion in water is symbolic of allowing Jesus to take control, letting the old self die, washing away the sins, and beginning life anew.

Jesus would have walked out into the Jordan River. They would have been in water at least waist high. John would have taken control of Jesus. He would have taken Jesus backwards into the river pushing him completely into the water. The Messiah's feet might have left their footing. [Drowning is definitely a fear when you loose your footing and someone else is in control of your body.] When pulled back up, Jesus would have felt a rush of the water washing over him. That first breath would have been exhilarating.

My mother and I were both Baptized in a church in Connecticut when I was about 12 years old. My mother actually took in some water and choked coming out of the water. I remember a tingling feeling that lasted for days and a desire to do whatever I could to learn more about the Messiah.

Then there are the people around you. Baptism is not a solo act. At least one person [the dunker] is there when you are taking this life changing symbolic step. When Jesus was baptized there were people there who saw the whole thing. In my case the church was full and at the bay there were a couple dozen people. They are your witness. Christians who witness a baptism feel the real desire to celebrate.

I had the opportunity to be baptized in the Chesapeake Bay a few years ago. Although I wrestled with the idea of being Baptized twice, I decided to go ahead with it. I wanted to feel the sensation of a natural baptism by emersion the way Jesus would have felt it. It is indeed different that being baptized in a dunking booth.

Baptism by Fire is quite a different thing altogether. Look at who John was talking to. There would be a mixture of people. There would be those who had repented and they were there to be baptized. There would be the curious and those who meant to shut that crazy man John down.

IMHO when John was talking about Baptism by fire he was talking to those who were not yet believers. It was an alter call.

Remember too that John was called by God to complete this mission. He would have been speaking for God and His words would have come from God. Later in the gospels we will see that John knew who Jesus was even when he was in the womb. I just don't want us to get ahead of ourselves.

The word fire is mentioned three times. We find it in verses 10, 11, and 12. In my reading, I've noticed that when something is really important it is repeated in the Bible 3 times. Verses 10 and 12 definitely talk about fire that is destructive. To me that just says judgment and punishment.

And... I have to say that I think the Holy Spirit of the Pentecost is a lot different than the Holy Spirit after repentance. We'll probably see that a lot clearer after going through the gospels chapter by chapter.

You may not have read it when I've said it a few times before, but I was raised in various Protestant churches. My father was baptized in the Baptist church, so I'm well aware of what their baptism entails. I watched my father get baptized by immersion for the first and only time when he was in his 40s. Is that how John did it? Yes. Is that the only way to do it? No. Surely, there have been occasions when someone has desired baptism and did not have a body of water, pool, or any such thing available to them where immersion was possible. Should such a person be denied baptism? I certainly don't think so. Form and intent matter, not whether one is immersed or not. In fact, there is evidence from both scripture and the early church (circa 50-120 AD) that immersion wasn't a requirement.

I'll try to leave it at that, as I don't want our conversations to become a debate, right or wrong, etc. I would appreciate it if you would keep that in mind as well when discussing the gospel with me.

You're right that John may have been talking about destruction in the verse in question. This especially may be true because the Holy Spirit revealed itself not as fire but a dove when Jesus was baptized in the same scenario.

[hotcoffee]

Originally Posted by Radiant1

You may not have read it when I've said it a few times before, but I was raised in various Protestant churches. My father was baptized in the Baptist church, so I'm well aware of what their baptism entails. I watched my father get baptized by immersion for the first and only time when he was in his 40s. Is that how John did it? Yes. Is that the only way to do it? No. Surely, there have been occasions when someone has desired baptism and did not have a body of water, pool, or any such thing available to them where immersion was possible. Should such a person be denied baptism? I certainly don't think so. Form and intent matter, not whether one is immersed or not. In fact, there is evidence from both scripture and the early church (circa 50-120 AD) that immersion wasn't a requirement.

I'll try to leave it at that, as I don't want our conversations to become a debate, right or wrong, etc. I would appreciate it if you would keep that in mind as well when discussing the gospel with me.

You're right that John may have been talking about destruction in the verse in question. This especially may be true because the Holy Spirit revealed itself not as fire but a dove when Jesus was baptized in the same scenario.

Since Baptism is a symbol.... sure it can be done in different ways.

Baptism isn't necessary for Salvation. It's a symbol, a display.

As for my being baptized twice... I actually regret that I did it a little. The true baptism that took place when I was a baby in christianity was so profound. The second time in the bay was more of an "oh well" event. I learned from it.... it is different.

I'm really enjoying these discussions. I'm sure Chapter 4 will bring about more conversations. There is so much more in it.

[Radiant1]

Originally Posted by hotcoffee

Since Baptism is a symbol.... sure it can be done in different ways.

Baptism isn't necessary for Salvation. It's a symbol, a display.

I see you're going to go there anyway. Suffice it to say that, no baptism is not just a symbol. :sigh:

Originally Posted by hotcoffee

As for my being baptized twice... I actually regret that I did it a little. The true baptism that took place when I was a baby in christianity was so profound. The second time in the bay was more of an "oh well" event. I learned from it.... it is different.

If you think baptism just a symbol, then why call your first one the "true" one? (I don't really want an answer, it's a rhetorical question).

Originally Posted by hotcoffee

I'm really enjoying these discussions. I'm sure Chapter 4 will bring about more conversations. There is so much more in it.

I've been enjoying them as well, but if we can't continue without getting into a quagmire I'll stop.

Moving on to chapter 4?

[migtig]

Originally Posted by Radiant1

I see you're going to go there anyway. Suffice it to say that, no baptism is not just a symbol. :sigh:

Hold on, what for me.

Listen is a baptism a symbol or not? I agree with Hotcoffee that a baptism is not necessary for salvation. I have seen people "baptise" their children when those babes have no clue what's even going on. It seems symbolic to me.

Maybe I've missed something in this conversation. Which is entirely possible.