Luke 3:1-6

Butler's Comments

The Baptizer's Mission (Luke 3:1-6)

3 In the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar, Pontius Pilate being governor of Judea, and Herod being tetrarch of Galilee, and his brother Philip tetrarch of the region of Ituraea and Trachonitis, and Lysanias tetrarch of Abilene, 2in the high-priesthood of Annas and Caiaphas, the word of God came to John the son of Zechariah in the wilderness; 3and he went into all the region about the Jordan, preaching a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins. 4As it is written in the book of the words of Isaiah the prophet,

The voice of one crying in the wilderness:
Prepare the way of the Lord, make his paths straight.

5Every valley shall be filled, and every mountain and hill shall be brought low,

and the crooked shall be made straight,
and the rough ways shall be made smooth;

6and all flesh shall see the salvation of God.

Luke 3:1-2 Context: Tiberius (cf. Lesson 1, sec. 3) was joint emperor with his step-father Augustus (Octavian) from 11 A.D. until 14 A.D. when Augustus died and he became emperor alone. He was an able administrator but cruel and suspicious. He conducted countless treason trials and executed scores of people he considered dangerous to his power. He died in senile debauchery on the island of Capri, March 16, A.D. 37. He was the reigning emperor at the time of Christ's death.

A number of political changes had taken place in Judea since Luke's first historical references to Herod, king of Judea (Luke 1:5) and Caesar Augustus (Luke 2:1). Those men had ruled thirty years ago. Since that time, Herod the Great had died and his kingdom had been divided between his three sons; Herod Antipas, tetrarch of Galilee; Herod Philip, tetrarch of Ituraea and Trachonitis; Archelaus, tetrarch of Judea. Archelaus had been deposed of his throne in Judea in A.D. 6 by the Roman emperor for mismanagement (at the request of the Jews). The Roman emperor had placed Judea under the rule of a Roman Procurator. Pontius Pilate, whom tradition says was the son of famous army general and married to the granddaughter of Augustus, was the fifth procurator, having been appointed in 26 A.D. Annas, Jewish high priest appointed by Quirinius the legate of Syria in A.D. 6, had been deposed by Gratus, the first Roman procurator of Judea, in A.D. 15, and now Caiaphas, Annas-' son-in-law was High Priest. Luke does not mention all these changes because he is not writing a history of the Roman empire or of Judea, but a biography of Jesus Christ. And so far as Luke is concerned, the real significance of these great people (7 of them) is that the beginning of Jesus-' ministry (and that of John the Baptist) dates from this time in their lives.

Luke 3:3-6 Content: The region of John's ministry was the area around the Jordan valley known as the wilderness of Judea (cf. Matthew 3:1; Mark 1:4). It was a barren, uninhabited, insect-infested, sultry-hot region from the Dead Sea area on the south to Succoth on the north (cf. 2 Chronicles 4:17). Most of his ministry was spent along the western banks of the river Jordan, but John notes (Luke 10:40) that he also preached on the eastern side. He did all his preaching near water since response to his message required immersion (baptism).

He preached an immersion of repentance for the forgiveness of sins. John the Immerser was a unique, supernaturally-commissioned, Godsent link between the Old Covenant and the New Covenant. John's ministry was to announce the imminent abrogation of the Law and the Prophets because the kingdom of God which they symbolized and predicted had arrived (in the person of the King). The law and the prophets were until John.. (Luke 16:16). What John preached was authoritative; it was from God. He was sent to prepare the people of Israel to turn away from the Old system to the New Kingdom. He intended that they not only repent of their ethics but also of their theology. They would have to turn from the type and shadow system by which no flesh could be justified, to justification by faith in a Person, The Son of God! Those who did prepare themselves for the imminent coming of the New Kingdom by repenting as John preached were immersed for the remission of their sins. In that state they awaited the establishment of the New Kingdom. John's immersion was performed under the authority of God and was valid until God transferred that authority to the Son. After Christ ascended to the right hand of the Father in heaven authority in the area of covenant terms was assumed by Him. He subsequently poured out His Spirit on the day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-47) and announced that immersion must be in His name (Jesus Christ) that is, in recognition of His Lordship over all. Because the lines of communication in the first century A.D. were not as well coordinated and established as they are in our day, it took some time for everyone who had been immersed with John's immersion to get the inspired word that John's immersion was no longer authoritative (cf. Acts 18:24-25; Acts 19:4).

But from the day of John's preaching until the day of Pentecost, John's immersion was valid. Those who believed and were immersed by John and died before the day of Pentecost would as surely be saved as Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, and all the other Old Testament saints who, having put their trust in the promises of God, were justified by their faith (cf. Romans 1:1-32 :ff; Galatians 3:1 ff). No man today could say he is in proper covenant relationship to God if he knows what the New Testament says about immersion into Christ and refuses to obey it, any more than those who heard John's message and refused it could be said to be right with God (cf. Luke 7:29-30). The believer's trust must be in Jesus Christ. The believer surrenders in obedience to immersion because Jesus commanded it, not because the ritual itself has some magic in it. Those who submitted to John's immersion did so because they justified God (Luke 7:29); that is, they put God in the right place; they made Him sovereign, they believed John spoke by the authority of God. Their faith was in God, not in immersion per se. Those Pharisees whose faith was in their own traditions and self-righteousness, rejected the purpose of God for themselves, and would not be immersed by John because they believed they had no need of repentance and immersion in the muddy Jordan River. Many religious people who profess faith in God today refuse to be immersed in water for the remission of sins for the same fundamental reasonthey have put their faith in a church's tradition and not in the sovereign Word of Christ.

Some Bible students have taught that John's baptism was not really a unique practice of his age. Some have said that his baptism had its roots in Jewish proselyte baptism while others imply that he was copying the rites of the Essenes. John's baptism did not come from Jewish proselyte baptism for the following reasons:

a.

History has no record of Jewish proselyte baptism prior to John the Baptistin fact not until the 3rd century A.D.

b.

The Old Testament has only one word that would resemble New Testament immersion (baptizo) and that is the Hebrew word taval. All other Hebrew words (kavas, rachatz, shataph, duach) mean to wash or bathe for religious purposes.

c.

The Hebrew word taval is the only specific word meaning, immerse, dip, plunge. The Septuagint (Greek version of the Hebrew text translated about 300 B.C.) uses the Greek word baptizo only once for the Hebrew word taval and that is in 2 Kings 5:14. The word baptizo appears in only one other place in the Septuagint (Isaiah 21:4) and there it is a translation of the Hebrew word ba-ath which means to overwhelm. Everywhere else the Hebrew word taval is used in the Septuagint, the word bapto or a derivative is used.

d.

The Greek word baptizo appears only twice in the Hebrew Apocrypha (in the LXX), Jdt. 12:7; Sir. 34:25; in neither case does it appear in connection with any proselyte baptism.

e.

Proselyte baptism (immersion) is not mentioned anywhere in the Old Testament, the Jewish Apocrypha, the New Testament, Josephus, Philo, Jewish Targums or the Mishna.

f.

None of the early Christian writers such as Barnabas, Justin Martyr or Tertullian, all of whom discussed both Jews and Christian baptism, mention Jewish proselyte baptism.

John's baptism could not have come from the Essenes (Qumranians) for the following reasons:

a.

The water of impurity used by the Qumranians (1QS Luke 3:4-9) was not an initiatory rite but was reserved for the practice of cleansing those already in the covenant.

b.

There really is no textual proof (from the Dead Sea Scrolls) that these Essene washings were by immersion.

c.

Josephus in his, Wars, II 8:5, writes about the Essenes, ... they assemble themselves together. into one place, and when they have clothed themselves in white veils, they then bathe their bodies in cold water. No mention of immersion, specifically.

The scriptures say John's immersion came directly from God by revelation (cf. Luke 1:13-17; Luke 1:76-79; John 1:33). The multitudes believed his ministry came from God (Matthew 21:23-27). The Jewish rulers considered it something different than anything then being practiced religiously, and something that only Elijah or the Messiah would have the authority to institute (John 1:24-28). Even Jesus, through His disciples, practiced the pre-Christian baptism of John (cf. John 3:26-27; John 4:1-2). John's immersion came from God; it was efficacious as an expression of repentance and for the remission of sins until Jesus commanded all men to be immersed in His (Jesus-') name.

John's ministry was no accident! It was foreknown and foretold some 700 years before by Isaiah (cf. Isaiah 40:3-4). John's ministry was second in importance only to the ministry of the Messiah Himself. Jesus would later say that of all those born of human parentage not one would be greater than John the Baptist (cf. Matthew 11:11). For four hundred years (since the days of Malachi) God had been silent. There had been no revelation from God about that kingdom and that King He had foretold by the prophets. Suddenly John the Baptizer burst upon the scene. Many recognized that John had been sent from Godhe was a prophet! He was a voice from God. When an Oriental monarch was preparing to visit an area of his kingdom, he usually sent a herald ahead of him, announcing his coming and commanding his subjects to prepare a roadway over which he might pass free of all obstacles, smooth, level and straight. So John was the herald commanding the subjects of the King of kings to make an obstacle-free, smooth, level and straight road into their hearts where He wishes to travel and abide.