Awhile back a blog dedicated to Biblical theology was discussing what it meant for Jesus’ baptism to “fulfill all righteousness.” One of the commentators brought up Broughton Knox’s take on the passage. Know writes:
In other words, Jesus said that it was right for him to identify with John’s messianic movement, for John’s baptism was “from God” (Matt 21:25) and Jesus would not stand aloof from it but ‘while all the people were being baptized’ (Lk 3:21) it was suitable that Jesus too should be baptized. It was the ‘right thing to do’. It was right for John, who was sent from God to baptize with water (John 1:33) to baptize Jesus and so include him in the movement along with all other God-fearing Jews who were awaiting the kingdom, and it was right for Jesus to accept John as the God-sent leader at that time and so accept baptism at his hands. In this way it was appropriate for both of them that John should baptize Jesus and that Jesus should identify with John’s message in the way that God had ordained, i.e., by being baptized by him in water, for God had sent him to baptize with water (John 1:33). That is, the baptism of Jesus was a baptism of discipleship, for at that time John was the leader. When the providence of God removed John from the leadership through Herod shutting him up in prison, then Jesus took over the leadership, preaching the same gospel. However, it would seem that he dropped the rite of baptizing with water, though his disciples revived it on the day of Pentecost.
What do you think of this interpretation? What is your interpretation of this intriguing and perplexing passage?
Thinking to Believe 
January 5, 2007 at 2:27 pm
Jesus was baptized to “fulfill all righteousness” by becoming the Son of God.
At his baptism, God quoted Psalm 2:7 when he said to Jesus, “You are my Son; today I have become your Father.”
You might protest that the wording of the baptism (Luke 3:21–22; Mark 1:9–11; Matt 3:13–17; John 1:29–34) in most Bibles, has God say “you are my Son, the beloved, with you I am well pleased.” But apart from the obvious parallel to Psalm 2:7 and the obvious banality and irrelevance of its replacement, there is proof that the original scripture was adoptionist.
First, some of the earliest manuscripts retain the original wording. You can find this in the footnotes of many Bibles.
Second, the Bible retains clear internal evidence of the original scripture. In Hebrews 1, Paul explains why Jesus is greater than the angels: “So he became as much superior to the angels as the name he has inherited is superior to theirs. For to which of the angels did God ever say, ‘You are my Son; today I have become your Father’? Or again, ‘I will be his Father, and he will be my Son'” [Heb 1:4-5]
Thus, Paul and his audience knew that the original wording was “today I have become your father.” It was then, at his baptism, that Jesus went from ordinary man to Son of God. The wording of the scriptures were later changed for doctrinal reasons.
LikeLike
February 20, 2010 at 7:40 am
I’ve never heard of anything along these lines. You say “some of the earliest manuscripts retain the original wording. You can find this in the footnotes of many Bibles.” I’m just curious, can you tell me which bibles contain these footnotes?
This would seem to put into question the idea of Mary being impregnated by God and the virgin birth, etc. If God wasn’t the father of Jesus from the day Jesus was born, then who was?
LikeLike
November 3, 2010 at 7:36 pm
Hi,
I see it as Jesus fullfiling the written word as the Father spoke. The dove as the H.S. would be revealed as the comforter. This would be The Father the written word, the Son the promised Messiah, the H.S. would be revealed on the Day of Pentecost. Righteousness would be in the three revealed when Jesus was baptized. It is a fulfillment of prophecy (written word)but yet a prophecy. In other words Jesus is in right standing with the written word, prophecy and eternal life.
Charles
LikeLike
September 7, 2016 at 8:18 am
The practice of baptism in the New Testament is different than the ritual purification rights practiced by the Jews at that time. New Testament baptism is purposed to unite the repented sinner with the forgiver of sin; Jesus Christ. The scriptures are absolutely clear about this Rom 6:2-10, Col 2:9-15, and several other places explains how believers are united with Christ’s redemptive work of the Gospel; His death, burial, resurrection for the forgiveness of sins (Col 1:14).
There is a diasctintion between the baptism for the forgiveness of sins of the gospel John the baptist preached with the baptism for the forgiveness of sins preached by the Apostles. John’s baptism was of repentance (the death of the individuals life against God), meaning they were buried in their own death without a resurrection to life. However, they confessed their sins in the burial of John’s baptism of repentance, whereby Christ, being buried with them in their own deaths toward sin, became united with us in our sin. Righteousness was fulfilled when Christ, being united with us in water baptism, carried the sins of all that were baptized into John’s baptism of repentance and nailed them to the cross! Christ did not die a legal death on the cross, for if He had no sin to nail to the cross, His death would have been illegal and of no effect. John’s baptism was the provision of sin (repented and confessed) to be forgiven (all) and post death, burial, and resurrection baptism in the name of Jesus Christ is for the forgiveness of sin for each individual that believes God’s word by believing the gospel of God, and through obedience of faith in what the word of God says by repenting, being baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your (individual) sins, and receiving the baptism of the Holy Spirit as described and testified by Jesus Christ in John 3:8.
Simply put, we either believe what God says or we don’t. Jesus said to the seventy “he that theareth you, heareth me (Luke 10:16). This was His attitude to all the writers and prophets of the scriptures. Whether the words of your Bible are written in red or black makes no difference, all of the words are from the mouth of God.
The word ‘apostle” means: messengers sent with orders.The Apostles were sent with the message of His gospel, with the order to believe and obey the gospel If we don not believe what they say, we do not believe what God said. This is why baptism is not a work of the flesh or of the law. It a work of faith in believing what God said (or says). To help us understand this a little further, Jesus asked the Jews that were persecuting Him “For if you believed Moses, you would believe Me, for he wrote about Me. 47“But if you do not believe his writings, how will you believe My words?”. This is what Jesus meant: Moses spoke the words of God, if you don’y believe him, then you don’t believe what God said (or says). Therefore, since it is already established that you don’t believe or understand what God said, how can you believe my words, I AM God!
LikeLike
September 7, 2016 at 8:20 am
Correction, I meant to say, Christ did not die and ILLEGAL death
LikeLike
September 7, 2016 at 12:09 pm
B Bob:
You regurgitate dogma rhetoric of Christians who have no idea who Jesus was and why he began his campaign.
And the truth is Jesus campaigned against the works of religion and the clergy who perpetuate falsehoods are evil and what you are preaching is exactly what the Pharisees said..church dogma.
Christians keep saying Jesus nailed sin to the cross which is so much caca del toro; it was sin that nailed Jesus to the cross, the sin of religious self righteousness and nonsense about sacrifices and offerings. That is the hogwash of religion that tries to make everybody feel guilty that they are wallowing in sin; it’s the same religious tactic that nutrition salesmen talk about the product they’re selling to people by saying that they need their nutritious product because people who do not are toxic; in other words, full of poison, full of sin.
When John objected to Jesus being baptized, when all the crowds were watching, Jesus said “do it for all righteousness” and what Jesus meant was that because the crowds believed John was a Prophet Jesus did not want to compromise the crowd’s belief in John if John refused to baptize Jesus. Remember Jesus and John were cousins and quite possibly half brothers. They also knew each other through their childhood, teenage and adult years as they grew into their own convicted campaign careers; each on a mission the one complimenting the other
Say what you want but the reason came Jesus came was to expose the evils of religion and the clergy that fomented the evil by useless ritualism Which is how the Pharisees and Scribes were able to infiltrate Christianity and change its direction and return it back to the old fashion, tired traditional Mosaic Law and Religion and eventually the real message from Jesus was forgotten and yet Christians today still forget the evils of religion that Jesus testified of and warned us about and they perpetuate still the failed Laws of Moses and still plod around in circles, spinning their tires in a snow blind pattern of dizzy-ny land fantasy of sacraments, sacrifices, prayer rituals, finger beading, bible thumping and hand-raising hallelujahs……….the Mosaic futility and insignificance of idle ceremonies, mummeries and observances, of no effect towards producing the social utilities which constitute the essence of virtue; such a one is the keeping of the Sabbath; thus, that the Pharisaical proselytes still continue to make a big deal of disregarding Jesus completely except in name fulfilling the scripture of Isaiah as in Matt 15:8: “‘These people honor Me with their lips, but their hearts are far from Me. They worship Me in vain; And their reverence for Me consists of tradition learned by rote……”
Now the God I am talking about is the God Jesus called Father and said that the Father lives within you and within everyone and that was the guide of Jesus, not the supernatural God of the Pharisees and today’s Christians who only focus on the paranormal God of myth, miracles and magic. The supernatural Caricature Concept of Ancient Mythology.
Now you see, we’re without excuse because the Lord Jesus deliberately chose to sanctify himself, so that we in him would know the truth whereby we too may be sanctified. Sanctify them through thy word, they word is truth; in other words, God’s word contains a principle; it’s a principle to live by. I don’t mean pretty little bible stories that you simply know, textually, so that you can tell the story of Daniel and the lion’s den; or, David and Goliath, all part of God’s inspired word but you see if you just memorize bible stories or for that matter memorize bible verses but you don’t understand the truth, the principle that God is communicating, then you might just as well recite three blind mice and this is the tragedy with countless evangelical, born again believers, they have a bible that they’ve come to know textually but they’ve never learned the truth!
LikeLike
June 27, 2018 at 2:22 pm
Hi Jason, I had a question about marriage that I wanted to ask you about.
I was reading your article on Justification and Regeneration
and you stated that Justification by faith is basically when God legally declares us to be righteous (imputation), and regeneration is when what was legally declared at Justification becomes a conferred spiritual reality in us (impartation). You also stated that Regeneration happens when one is water baptized in Jesus name and filled with the HG , evidenced by speaking in tongues.
My question for you is if a believer that has been regenerated according to (Acts 2:38) wants to marry a believer who has only has been
Justified by/through faith (Rom 5:1),
would it be Biblically wrong for them to get married according to (2 Corinthians 6:14) that says be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers, and (Mark 16:16-17)?
Or would it be Biblically permissible for them to marry because the person who has been Justified by faith only and not regenerated yet, technically is still a believer.
(Rom 5:1) ?
Thanks..
LikeLike
June 27, 2018 at 4:27 pm
James:
What is amazing about your questions is that your questions are purely philosophical questions but God never spoke philosophy and neither did Jesus.
Now Paul on the other hand, Paul was a philosopher and talked philosophicalspeake non stop; Paul was academically reared and educationally versed in religious philosophy; the words, justification, regeneration, imputation, impartation, drip of Paul’s religion like rainstream on a church stained-glass window.
Jesus was not a philosopher. He taught about marriage with unpretentious simplicity. And while Jesus taught such messages about humanity Paul was running all over the villages searching, ferreting, persecuting, harassing and murdering the followers of Jesus. Why? Because Paul the Pharisee had a position and a religion to promote and protect against any intrusive challenges.
Does it not puzzle you or any person who claims s/he is a Christian to be constantly citing Paul’s philosophy for biblical guidance instead of Jesus the person who you claim to follow? I don’t get it.
Nevertheless. I will offer Jesus’s answer to your posted query as Paul can never guide anybody about the message Jesus taught.
Jesus offered three reasons to get marriage, three very natural reasons, three things that constitutes marriage and only three things needed to be considered. And the three things have absolutely nothing to do with philosophical belief.
Without citing exceptions to the rule, 1. Male and female they are and by natural attraction drawn to each other, 2. Their mindsets mutually yield and consensually cling to each other. 3. the two in sexual union consummate the marriage and become one in body. mind and spirit.
And that marriage union condition supersedes all philosophy, all belief, all scriptures, all laws and all else for that is the nature of the design of humanity and the human experience.
LikeLike
June 29, 2018 at 8:11 am
Hi Jason,
I also forgot to also ask,
Can a believer who has submitted to Acts 2:38 marry a believer that has the Jesus Name water baptism
but hasn’t received the Holy Spirit yet (i.e they have not spoken in tongues) , or is this un-biblical to do.
Also can someone who has submitted to Acts 2:38 marry a believer that has the Holy Spirit but doesn’t have the Jesus name water baptism ,
or is this un-biblical to do.
Thanks ..James
LikeLike
June 29, 2018 at 12:58 pm
Hello:
LikeLike
June 29, 2018 at 12:59 pm
Water baptism is symbolic for those who need symbolism to keep their “change” or “commitment” as a mark on their forehead (foremost In their mindset -in memory.)
This is the same symbolism that caused Moses to lift up the snake in the wilderness, so the Son of Man must be lifted up for those who need symbolism as reminders but not everybody needs symbolism to be filled with the Spirit; Jesus didn’t need baptism but wanted to show the people who did need that, that it was okay and proper to participate, although water baptism is not necessary for believers. Jesus did it to show an example, others do it as a reminder but Baptism is not necessary to be filled with the spirit anymore than Moses needed the serpent image to remind him of devilish behaviour.
Now why did Moses lift up then serpent? He lifted up, not the serpent, but a bronze likeness of the snake image, to remind people that temptation and backsliding is common, so every time the people passed by the bronze snake it served as a reminder for the people to be on the lookout, be alert to waywardness, that temptation, evil and backsliding was not far away…. so keep this in mind.
In Acts 10:37-38, the ministry of Jesus is described as following “the baptism which John preached”.
Peter’s message about Jesus following the baptism of John is a false message; Jesus message was not about following the baptism of John. Jesus offered the “Moses lifting up the snake” analogy as an example easily applied to baptism as it serves the same purpose as the bronze snake.
Then Peter said to them Acts 2:38 “Repent, and let every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit it may appear from the syntax that “you will be given the Holy Spirit” but baptism and “given the spirit” are not necessarily inclusive, one does not necessarily follow the other; therefore it follows, that since the two can be mutually exclusive neither behaviour can be called unbiblical, nor should they.
However, if you continue on just a few more verses, you will read (John 4:1-3): “Now when Jesus learned that the Pharisees had heard that Jesus was making and baptizing more disciples than John (although Jesus himself was not baptizing, just his disciples), he left Judea and returned to Galilee.”
The synoptic writers – Matthew, Mark and Luke – offer no clarity on this, because they are silent on the question of Jesus baptizing. That;’s is why Jesus never needed baptism and why John said as much because Jesus was already full of the Spirit…but “for the sake of all righteousness” let the baptism be a reminder to others just like the Moses’s serpent in the desert.
LikeLike
June 29, 2018 at 4:42 pm
James:
Do you mean to say that speaking in tongues is the sign of having the Holy Spirit and not speaking in tongues, a sign you have not received the Holy Spirit?
I don’t know what cult you belong to but your questions suggest you are from a Cult called Ludicrous.
LikeLike