Jews and Greeks (Matthew 28.19–20), that Jesus the Christ was the Savior of all the world.
Sources for the Genealogies
At the time these authors wrote, about C.E. 80–85, it would have been very difficult to gain accurate information for a genealogical tree. The invasion by the Romans in C.E. 66 to put down the rebellion of the Jews and the subsequent destruction of many cities and villages resulted in the destruction of records that might have supplied information for the evangelists. Since there was a widespread tradition among Jews of the time that the Messiah would descend from David, it is evident that both writers are concerned to link Jesus genealogically with King David and also with the patriarchs, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Matthew’s genealogy for Jesus fulfills this requirement appropriately, since he simply traces the royal line of kings from David to Joseph. He then extends the link back to the patriarchal fathers—Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Thus he has supplied the necessary credentials for Jesus, so that he might be accepted by the Jewish reader as the expected Messiah. The sources for Luke’s genealogy are not nearly so evident, since he has traced the descent from David through Nathan. There is only a passing reference without information about this son in 2 Samuel 5.14 (see also Zechariah 12.12). The extension of this genealogy to Adam links the descent of Jesus to God’s original creation and demonstrates his relationship to all humanity, whereas Matthew typically places the emphasis upon Jesus’ Jewish lineage. The sources for the names in Luke’s genealogy from Heli to Zerubbabel are unknown. He has used genealogical lists from Genesis, Ruth and Chronicles for other portions of Jesus’ family tree.
It may be that the effort to provide Jesus with proper credentials came about through a kind of syllogistic argument. The three parts of a syllogism are: thesis, antithesis, and synthesis. Accordingly, the thesis with which the Christian community begins is, Jesus is the Messiah; the antithesis, the Messiah descends from David; and the synthesis, since Jesus is Messiah, therefore he descends from David. The genealogical lists are constructed accordingly. Of course, it may be argued that this is true to fact, but the unresolvable problem remains that there are many irreconcilable differences between the two genealogies.
The Importance of the Genealogies
What, if any, is their importance? They are important historically, since they throw light on problems that the Christian community encountered in its proclamation to the Jewish community that Jesus is the Christ. They are important theologically, since they demonstrate the mystery of salvation. Our salvation is not in any way the result of human wisdom or achievement. Salvation is the gift of God, and God’s act of redemption transcends human reason and understanding. The circumstances of Jesus’ birth and lineage do not result in nor are they the cause of our salvation. God alone is Redeemer and Lord. The testimony of our gospel writers was never intended to be a proof that can logically demonstrate to us the mind and purpose of God, nor to give us the security of knowing that this is how it came about. Problems and questions remain, no matter how sincerely and thoroughly we search for answers. And this drives us back to the basic, fundamental principle of our faith as stated so succinctly by Paul, “By grace you have been saved through faith; and this is not your own doing, it is the gift of God” (Ephesians 2.8).
The Baptism of Jesus
Matthew 3.13–17; Mark 1.9–11; Luke 3.21–22
¶ The three accounts of the baptism of Jesus in our gospels provide an opportunity for a critical comparison of the intentions and special concerns of each writer and some conclusions as to how we are to read and interpret their “stories about Jesus.”
If we begin with Mark, which according to many critics is the oldest and most primitive account, we have a rather straightforward narration of this event in the experience of Jesus. Let us note first that the time reference is very indefinite—“in those days.” It may surprise some readers to learn that one of the unanswered problems for New Testament students is a meaningful chronology for the events in Jesus’ life. Our calendar, or method of reckoning time for the Christian era, was designed by Dionysius Exiguus in the sixth century; supposedly he began with the year of Jesus’ birth. But there was obviously an error of some magnitude when he designed our calendar, since Jesus, according to Matthew and Luke, was born when Herod the Great was King of the Jews. Yet Herod died in B.C.E. 4 according to known records. We find that time references throughout the gospels are vague and indefinite. The writers did not have precise information for a chronology of Jesus’ life and deeds. In fact, we do not even know precisely the year of his crucifixion because of contradictory references to the time of that event in our gospels.
The Role of John the Baptist
Mark relates that Jesus came from Nazareth of Galilee and was baptized by John in the Jordan. John the Baptist plays an important role in all gospel accounts as the forerunner, the one who announces the Coming One. In fact, John is mentioned more often than any other person in our gospels after Jesus himself. References to Peter, the leading disciple, are sparse by comparison. A peculiar feature of Luke’s account is that he makes no mention of John in the baptismal account. He has already completed his references to John, since the preceding pericope tells of his death. The author of Luke does refer to John in prison in a later passage (7.19), when he sends disciples to Jesus to inquire whether or not he is the Coming One. Mark and Matthew are more consistent at this point, since they narrate the death of John much later during the ministry of Jesus (Mark 6.14–29; Matthew 14.1–12). This discrepancy in Luke’s account should alert us immediately to a peculiar bias on the part of the author of Luke. He, more than the other gospel writes, wants the reader to focus exclusively upon the ministry of Jesus without the intrusion of a ministry by another.
The Markan Account
The baptismal experience, according to Mark, was a unique and radical event in the life of Jesus. He came as many others in response to the preaching of John and was baptized by him. We should be aware that baptism did not belong to the religious rituals practiced customarily by the Jews of the time. John’s baptism was a radical departure from Jewish practice and was therefore rejected by upper-class Jews and religious leaders (Mark 11.27–33). Baptism was only for proselytes, Gentiles who converted to the Jewish faith, except among a sectarian group known as Essenes where baptism was an initiation ritual for membership. John’s call to baptism was a demand that all Jews become like Gentiles before God. They too must through baptism be washed and cleansed of all sin in preparation for the eschatological judgment that was coming upon the world. The eschatological judgment was the final judgment marking the end of the age and the beginning of the reign of God through his Messiah, according to a current expectation among many Jews of the time. That Jesus accepted baptism by John indicates, according to Mark, that he accepted the premise and the requirements of John’s baptism. That is, he acknowledged his sinfulness before God and accepted God’s requirements for righteousness.
Baptism was a profound mystical and spiritual experience for Jesus. Mark’s statement, “he came up out of the water,” may be a recapitulation of the experience of Israel who had been delivered from destruction by God when he parted the waters of the Reed Sea. There may be some relatedness of ideas in this reference from Jesus’ baptism in Mark to Paul’s reference in First Corinthians, “our fathers were all under the cloud, and all passed through the sea, and all were baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea” (10.1–2). Just as the fathers had experienced a baptism of deliverance in preparation for their calling to be the people of God, so Jesus experienced deliverance through baptism from all that oppresses mankind, from all that separates from God, from all that frustrates God’s purpose for his creation. His life events—baptism, wilderness, ministry in the land of promise, death—encapsulate the life experience of Israel as the people of God; but with a difference, since God’s redemptive purpose that began with the patriarch Abraham and continued through Moses and the prophets is now finalized in this chosen one who came up out of the water to make salvation effective for all mankind.
Our English translation does not do justice to the expression, “the heavens opened.” The Greek word is much more dramatic—“the heavens were torn asunder.” In this way the author of Mark dramatizes the radical nature of the event for Jesus. It was indeed a most profound awakening, or awareness, for Jesus of God’s call to become the Messiah, the anointed