Why was Jesus baptized?

[Sovereign Grace]

I am preaching through Hebrews 10 at a church I have a monthly appointment. In the section I preached on this last Sunday night, vss 19-25, I covered the topic of baptism and how it is a sign and seal of the new covenant, but it in no way saves. After I finished the sermon a Brother spoke about Christ's baptism, and he asked a rhetorical question of why was Jesus baptized? He said it was not for His sins as He did not have any, but for our sins. I've never heard that before, and I cannot say I agree with it. I agree with Dr. W. Robert Godfrey and that Christ was baptized to identify with His ppl.


So, what say ye, ye blokes? Agree or disagree? I disagree.

 

[Polanus1561]

The multitudes of Jews repented and were baptized. Jesus came and was baptized to show he shall take on the baptism on the cross for the sake of such sins confessed.

 

[Contra_Mundum]

The brother's expression could be interpreted as another way of saying "Jesus identified with sinners."

The sign of baptism certainly points to the cross and the greater Exodus it represents.

Another reason: Jesus' baptism was the occasion of his anointing (recall, this word is the essence of "Christ/Messiah") by the Spirit, and if you are Presbyterian/Reformed, mirrored most likely by the physical act by means of water applied.

It was a significant moment on many levels.

 

[omniavanitas]

We can look at Exodus 4:24-26 and tie that in. The argument can be made that Moses was wrong here in not having circumcised his son. How could he lead others in what he wasn't even following? In Matthew 8:4 when Jesus heals the leper, He tells the newly healed man to go offer the "gift that Moses commanded" referring to Deuteronomy 24:8 (which refers to Leviticus 13:2 and 14:2). Jesus being fully God is so righteous that even being Lord over what He has commanded, He still carries it out. So it could be claimed that Jesus was setting an example.

You also have the theophany that follows which ties it into what Rev. Bruce said. The theophanies all reveal something about God that is critical to the metanarrative of Scripture but the people witnessing it don't quite understand. The burning bush reveals God's ability to take something on and not consume it (two natures of Christ), the three visitors reveal the Trinity, etc.

 

[chuckd]

Adding to this that it is a temporary experience, we find ourselves as near as could be expected under the circumstances to an expression of the vicarious relation of Jesus to the people of God. And it is but one step beyond this, if, taking into account the general scope of John's baptism, we should say that Jesus' identification with the people in their baptism had the proximate end of securing for them vicariously what the sacrament aimed at, the forgiveness of sin. Even with regard to repentance we may reason analogously; for if Jesus bore sin vicariously, and received forgiveness vicariously, then there can be no objection on principle to saying that He repented for the people vicariously. All these things are, however, hinted at here in a more or less enigmatic statement. The full exposition, which will at the same time furnish a full confirmation of the correctness of our exegesis, can be obtained only in the later discussion of John 1:29, 36.

-Geerhardus Vos, Biblical Theology, Part I, Ch. 3

 

[Elias_Amare]

Calvin, in his commentary, said there are two reasons why the Son of God wished to be baptised. "The general reason why Christ received baptism was, that he might render full obedience to the Father; and the special reason was, that he might consecrate baptism in his own body, that we might have it in common with him."

 

[MW]

but it in no way saves.

The Bible says that baptism saves us, and tells us the qualified way in which it does this. This "way" also explains why our Lord "must" be baptised and why we "must" also. Baptism saves as an outward sign of an inward grace. Jesus’ baptism was not for sin but for righteousness, inaugurating His mission and pointing to what He must undergo for His people. He atones for sin; baptism points to that reality.

 

[Alive in Christ]

But baptism does save. And, as a little bonus FYI, Christ is absolutely present (albeit spiritually) in the eucharist. The early fathers and the reformers couldn't be any more clear. As for why Jesus was baptized, Jesus said why - to fulfill all righteousness. As for the idea that He did it because He was taking our sin upon Himself, that seems a little far-fetched. Though it is not without precedence in my view. For instance, Psalms 41, which is about Jesus from beginning to end, has the part in verse 4 where David confesses to having sinned against God. Well, Jesus was covered in our sins, so the whole chapter applies. This is how I reconcile these prophecies which mention imperfection or sinning.

Here is a helpful section from the Got Questions website (a broken clock is right twice a day):

Spoiler

Jesus’ baptism by John takes on an added dimension when we consider that John was of the tribe of Levi and a direct descendant of Aaron. Luke specifies that both of John’s parents were of the Aaronic priestly line (Luke 1:5). One of the duties of the priests in the Old Testament was to present the sacrifices before the Lord. John the Baptist’s baptism of Jesus could be seen as a priestly presentation of the Ultimate Sacrifice. John’s words the day after the baptism have a decidedly priestly air: “Look, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world!”