So Jesus replied to him, “Let it happen now, for it is right for us to fulfill all righteousness.”
This has got to be one of the most confusing and difficult comments in the Bible to explain. I certainly don’t claim to have figured this out, but I’m trying. And so before I go any further, let me put out this disclaimer: Read this post as though I were thinking out loud but haven’t settled on anything yet. This is the next passage I’m preaching on and I really want to get this figured out…or at least come up with something that I can hold to with confidence.
The questions that arise when we look at this text are fairly obvious – one in particular: Why did Jesus have to be baptized? Jesus’ own answer to that question is the above quote. The problem is that Jesus – being God – was already righteous and sin-free and therefore had no need to be baptized. The answer I keep coming across in the commentaries is the suggestion that his baptism was a way for Jesus to “identify with” the people he came to save. Since he came to save sinners, he needed to identify with sinners through baptism. Unfortunately, they also fail to explain how they got to that point, the logic behind, and worst, the Biblical evidence that gets them to that point. And in my own study – as screwed-up as it is – I’m not getting that.
The approach I’ve been taking is to look at the words that are used and attempt to find correlations with other texts. I begin with “fulfill.” the Greek word is pleroo (πληρόω). Within the pages of Scripture, this word is typically used in discussions on the Law. Such use is consistent within both the Greek NT and the Septuagint (Greek OT). Now let that sit…
The next significant word here is “righteousness (dikaiosune).” This is where things get really confusing. ”Righteousness” is not a term that can be easily defined. But in a rather general sense, embedded within the definition of “righteousness” is the concept of relationship. It’s probably safe to speak of righteousness as being in a right relationship with someone or something. When we use the term in reference to God, we’re talking about being in right relationship with God.
Consistent with the pairing of the two words – pleroo and dikaiosune – Matthew’s use of dikaiosune tends toward a reference to right conduct (in my opinion, the emphasis on conduct is also consistent with Matthew’s overall focus on discipleship and living in a particular way). Therefore, in Jesus’ own words, he was being baptized in order ensure – or perhaps show those who witnessed the event – that he was in right relationship with the Father.
Now let me back up a little…
John’s preached and baptized and baptism of repentance (Mt 3:6). Sinners repent – not God. They repent for the purpose of returning to right relationship with God. A repentance takes place when someone recognizes that they have been living in a manner that violates God’s Law, and the relationship has been broken/damaged. With repentance comes forgiveness, with forgiveness comes righteousness. However, because of our sinful nature, we can never be truly righteous; we’re constantly violating the Law. Hence the reason we need Jesus. Jesus took our sins upon himself and received the punishment owed to us. Through his death, all “who believe in him” are made righteous.
But this was not the case with Jesus. He didn’t come to John confessing his sins and receiving a baptism of repentance. He came to be baptized “to fulfill all righteousness.” At this point, I’m taking this to mean that he came in order to show that he was in right relationship with the Father.
The Father’s voice from heaven then seems to make a little more sense. As Jesus completes this act of righteousness, everyone present hears these words:
This is my son whom I love, in him I am pleased.
Such a statement obviously denotes right relationship and lends weight to the idea of Jesus declaring his right relationship before the people. This also suggests that Jesus knew very well why he was being baptized; he knew that the Father was going to make this announcement and so he came to receive it. What that means is that it may be easier to understand Jesus’ statement if we work backwards a little and start with the Father’s words and what that may do for the way we understand “fulfill all righteousness.”
It seems to me that much of the talk about this statement is highly theologized. Jesus isn’t proposing a theological treatise for everyone within earshot; nor is Matthew. He’s basically presenting himself for ordination and making the statement that baptism needs to happen as part of the process of proving his righteousness and acceptance by the Father.
But at this point I still thinking out loud about this. What do you think? Does this make sense? Or am I way off mark?
Filed under: Bible Study, Christianity
