Jesus' Baptism

When I was studying the Book of Mormon I felt like I was assembling a beautiful 500 piece puzzle while looking at the box. With the D&C, it was another beautiful 500 piece puzzle while looking at the box, but the picture was more abstract, more colors and less detail so I had to work a little harder. With the New Testament, I feel like someone took 12 different 100 piece puzzles and dumped all the pieces into a bag, shook it up and now I have to sort them all out and put them back together. There are so many factors into the different accounts and the versions that we have and the IM’s different “see commentary for…” Needless to say it is a bit overwhelming and takes a lot of prep work especially now that we are working with all the gospels not must Matthew and Luke.

The Savior begins his ministry by going to John the Baptist to be baptized, and this is a most interesting concept to me. The first reason why Jesus’ baptism is interesting is because it didn’t seem to be practiced before. As far as I know, in the Old Testament, there is no mention of baptism. We know that Alma baptized in the land of Mormon about a hundred years before Christ was born, so it wasn’t something complete new or unheard of in the gospel but with the Palestinian Jews at the time of Christ, it seems that I’m not aware that it was practiced. I did a little research and came across an article in the September 1974 Ensign entitled, “I have a question.” The question is “Was John’s baptism a new ordinance or were the people already familiar with it?” That was exactly my question. There are a lot of good points made in the article as it begins, “Baptism by water was not new to the Jews of New Testament times. Although it is not completely clear from either secular history or the scriptures that the Jews were actually baptizing one another at that time, it was a regular practice among them to baptize gentile converts to Judaism.” Jews that were born into Judaism by heritage seem to be automatically enrolled into the religion, but those from the outside that wanted to join had to make the commitment by being submerged in water by proper authority. The article continues, “It is noticeable that when John came among the people, they did not ask him, ‘what new thing is this that you do?’ but rather they asked, ‘Who are you?’” They weren’t questioning what he was doing, only his authority to do it.

Jesus went to John the Baptist because John was the only legal administrator at the time, in other words, John was the only one who held the priesthood authority to perform the ordinance. All of the gospels mention the baptism of Jesus, some in more detail than others. Matthew tells us that Jesus went from Galilee “to Jordan unto John, to be baptized of him. But John forbade him, saying, I have need to be baptized of thee, and comest though to me? And Jesus answering said unto him, Suffer it to be so now: for thus it becometh us to fulfill all righteousness.” This is another facet of baptism that is interesting to me because it really emphasizes the purpose of baptism. One thing that really bothers me is that people only talk about baptism for the remission of sins. When my kids got baptized their teachers only talked about baptism being important because “all your sins are washed away.” And yes that’s true, but that’s not the only reason, baptism is an ordinance, it’s a covenant. The IM refers back to 2 Nephi 31 where Nephi teaches about the baptism of Jesus as he saw it in a vision. The IM quotes Elder Robert D. Hales as teaching, “Born of a mortal mother, Jesus was baptized to fulfill His Father’s commandment that sons and daughters of God should be baptized. He set the example for all of us to humble ourselves before out Heavenly Father. We are all welcome to come into the waters of baptism. He was baptized to witness to His Father that He would be obedient in keeping His commandments. He was baptized to show us that we should receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.” In order to enter into the Kingdom of God we must be baptized, Christ might have been perfect, but if he refused baptism because he didn’t need to remission of sins, then he wouldn’t have been allowed to enter into the Kingdom of God either. I feel that, yes, Jesus was baptized in order to set an example for us, but He needed to work out his own salvation as well.

Matthew continues, “And Jesus, when he was baptized, went up straightway out of the water, and, lo, the heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove, and lighting upon him.” There are two points that the IM makes about this appearance, first is that “Jesus Christ’s baptism teaches about the Godhead,” saying, “At the baptism of Jesus of Jesus Christ, all three members of the Godhead were separately manifest: Jesus was in the water, the voice of Heavenly Father was heard from heaven, and the Holy Ghost descended upon the Savior like a dove. Elder Jeffery R. Holland of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles emphasized that the doctrine of the Godhead is repeated throughout the scriptures: ‘We declare it is self-evident from the scriptures that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost are separate persons, three divine beings, nothing such unequivocal illustrations as the Savior’s great Intercessory Prayer…, His baptism at the hands of John, the experience on the Mount of Transfiguration, and the martyrdom of Stephen- to name just found… To whom was Jesus pleading so fervently all those years, including in such anguished cries as ‘O my Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me’ and ‘My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me.’” I know that other religions believe that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost are one being of spirit without a body, which doesn’t make sense on two counts, but I agree with Elder Holland, the scriptures make it clear that there are three separate and distinct personages, two with bodies.

The other question raised by the IM is, “Did the Holy Ghost appear as a dove?” and answers, “The Prophet Joseph Smith explained that the Holy Ghost did not appear as a dove after the baptism of Jesus Christ. Rather, the descending dove signified that the Holy Ghost was present on that occasion: ‘the sign of the dove was instituted before the creation of the world, a witness for the Holy Ghost, and the devil cannot come in the sign of a dove. The Holy Ghost is a personage, and is in the form of a personage. It does not confine itself to the form of a dove, but in sign of the dove. The Holy Ghost cannot be transformed into a dove; but the sign of a dove was given to John to signify the truth of the deed, as the dove is an emblem or token of truth and innocence.” This is a really interesting concept, so the dove was a real bird, and its appearance at that place at that time was a sign of the divinity of Christ. Interesting.

After the dove came down, “lo a voice from heaven, saying, This is my Beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.” The IM comments, “The voice of Heavenly father was heard at the time of the Savior’s baptism- one of the few times when the voice of the Father is recorded in scripture (see Matthew 3:17; 17:5; 3 Nephi 11:7; Joseph Smith- History 1:17). In each of these instances, He spoke to introduce His Son to a mortal man.” This is so abstract for me because we have movies, tv, headphones, all types of stuff that feed sound right into our brains so I imagine that it would be like a movie announcer or something. I don’t know. No false Christ has ever had God himself testify of his divinity. I’m going to have to think about this.