Why did John the Baptist need to be baptized?

[mizpeh]

Originally Posted by pelathais

My understanding of Matthew 3:13-15 is that here we see something of an exclamation by John concerning his perception of own unworthiness and helplessness to do anything that would "save" himself. I don't think Matthew intends for us to see John's words here as a teaching; rather they are an expression of emotion and faith; a sort of rhetorical statement by John.

Thank you, Pel, for your well thought out answer.

It makes you wonder how close to the chest Jesus and John's parents kept what God had revealed to them about these two from before they were born. Did Elizabeth, Zacharias, Mary, and Joseph ever get together at family reunions or feast days in Jerusalem and discuss what the prophets and angels had foretold them concerning their offspring? Or did they keep it quiet? afterall Joseph was made to flee Judea early on to Egypt because Herod wanted to kill Jesus. If they voiced who their Son was, they might invite attacks from others. All this to say, Did John know Jesus was the Christ who came to save us from our sins? He seemed to know that He was paving the way for the coming of the LORD, who without a doubt, John was unworthy (as are we all) to untie His shoelaces. How much more if John knew that Jesus was the LORD coming to save us from our sins, and John's baptism consisted of repentant Jews confessing their sins in the river and then being baptized for the remission of those confessed sins, that John would feel inadequate to baptize the One who had no sin and had come to save mankind from their sins? Of course John would feel the need to be baptized by Jesus and not to be the one to baptize Jesus!!!

Do you think Thomas's exclamation to Jesus "my Lord and my God" was that of emotion like "OMG" or more in the line of declaring "you are my Lord and my God"?

John's baptism was a "baptism of repentance for the remission of sin..." (Mark 1:4; Luke 1:77, Luke 3:3 and others).

Does this mean John was baptizing "because" the repentant person's sins were already forgiven or so that the repentant persons sins would be forgiven?

John's apparent incredulity was caused by the fact that Jesus came to be baptized by John when Jesus had no sin. Jesus instructs John that His request did not involve sin, but righteousness.Baptism itself alone accomplishes no cleansing (1 Peter 3:21). It signifies the passage into a new life (Romans 6:4 and Colossians 2:12) when accompanied by faith. Jesus began His ministry with the "baptism of John" and this event was considered pivotal in the nascent church (Acts 1:22). Thus, Jesus' baptism shows us (among many other things) that Jesus had surrendered His human will to that of the Father and would embark upon His mission.

I get a little mixup in this section and that's why I speculated above. I've always understood that Jesus coming to John to be baptized was to reveal Jesus to Israel as their long awaited for Messiah, yet John seems to know this before he baptized Jesus.


John 1:29-36 The next day John seeth Jesus coming unto him, and saith, Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world. This is he of whom I said, After me cometh a man which is preferred before me: for he was before me. And I knew him not: but that he should be made manifest to Israel, therefore am I come baptizing with water. And John bare record, saying, I saw the Spirit descending from heaven like a dove, and it abode upon him. And I knew him not: but he that sent me to baptize with water, the same said unto me, Upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending, and remaining on him, the same is he which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost. And I saw, and bare record that this is the Son of God. Again the next day after John stood, and two of his disciples; And looking upon Jesus as he walked, he saith, Behold the Lamb of God!

John's only "need" for baptism was would have been:

1) To demonstrate a similar purpose,
2) To signify his own repentance and remission of sins had taken place.

How would John's sins have been remitted prior to baptism?

Since John was already on his mission he had no need for the life changing event of baptism at the time Jesus approached him. Whether or not he had been baptized earlier is an interesting question. Having been raised in the household of a Jewish priest with access to the temple, John no doubt had gone through the mikvahot or ritual Jewish cleanings which involved immersion in water.

Is it taught in the Law of Moses that ritual cleansings or the mikvah remitted sins?

Whether or not John needed to be baptized (see your reference to Luke 1:15) had either become moot or already been answered by the time the events described in Matthew 3 took place. Unfortunately the exact details appear to elude us. Perhaps John being filled with the Holy Ghost from the womb solves some questions concerning his own sin and repentance. The fact that he was a Nazarite (an Old Testament "holy warrior") from birth would seem to indicate that his own mission and new life may have been coincidental to his natural birth.

Wasn't John under the Law of Moses? How would John have had access to the "new life" we receive by being born again?

But my take on John's words are that they are intended as an exclamation of emotion and are not didactic.

I respectfully disagree with you.