Daily Writing

Prickly pear.

Thursday, 12 September 2024

And when He had fasted forty days and forty nights, afterward He was hungry. Matthew 4:2

Note: You can listen to today’s commentary courtesy of our friends at “Bible in Ten” podcast. (Click Here to listen).

You can also read this commentary, scrolling with music, courtesy of our friends at “Discern the Bible” on YouTube. (Click Here to listen), or at Rumble (Click Here to listen).

“And, having fasted forty days and forty nights, afterward He hungered” (CG).

In the previous verse, it noted that Jesus was led by the Spirit into the desolate where He was to be tested by the Traducer. Next, it says, “And, having fasted.”

The word is nésteuó, to fast or abstain from food. Strong’s adds in a note that such a fast is connected to religion. In other words, it is a period of self-denial to meet a set religious purpose. This word concerning fasting is mentioned eighteen times in the gospels, speaking to Israel under the law. It is almost mentioned twice in Acts 13 –

“Now in the church that was at Antioch there were certain prophets and teachers: Barnabas, Simeon who was called Niger, Lucius of Cyrene, Manaen who had been brought up with Herod the tetrarch, and Saul. ² As they ministered to the Lord and fasted [nésteuó], the Holy Spirit said, “Now separate to Me Barnabas and Saul for the work to which I have called them.” ³ Then, having fasted [nésteuó] and prayed, and laid hands on them, they sent them away.” Acts 13:1-3

This same word, nésteuó, is also used in some manuscripts in 1 Corinthians 7:5. Of this Spirit-led but self-imposed fast, it next says that it was for “forty days and forty nights.”

The words are drawn in parallel to two accounts from the Old Testament. The first is when Moses fasted for this period on two separate occasions, found in Exodus 24:18 & again in 34:28. These periods are repeated in Deuteronomy 9:9-18. The second is at the time of Elijah in 1 Kings 19:8 as the prophet went to Horeb, the same location where Moses had twice fasted while receiving the law.

It is not uncommon to read that the number forty here is a round number. Unlike the number 10, which is at times used idiomatically to signify an indeterminate period or set of events, there is nothing to suggest this with the period now being set forth. The narrative indicates forty days and forty nights is the amount of time Jesus fasted. Stating both days and nights highlights this. This is especially so because it was not forty days where He broke His fast each evening, but an entire cycle of time inclusive of both days and nights.

In the parallel account in Luke, it notes that Jesus’ testing was throughout this entire period. There it says, “days forty being tested by the devil.” Therefore, what this appears to mean is that the fasting itself was a part of the testing. In both accounts, only after it notes that He was hungry is the active trial by the devil then noted.

Jesus was led by the Spirit into this time of testing, the entire time of which is a testing by the devil. Because of this, one can see the logical reason why translating the word peirazó from the previous verse as “test” rather than “tempt” is preferred. God does not tempt anyone to sin (James 1:13 – where the same word peirazó is used, but obviously with a different intended meaning). Jesus was tested during His Spirit-led time, and we likewise are tested in our lives at times.

Therefore, even if the devil tempted Jesus after His fasting, the entire period is better described as one of testing, not temptation. As for Jesus’ time of forty days and forty nights, it next says, “afterward He hungered.”

Such a fast would certainly lead to this state. But it was during this time of fasting that the miraculous nature of Christ and His being sustained by God is truly placed on prominent display. A human cannot normally exist without food and water for even a much shorter time. Without food, yes, but water is absolutely necessary to sustain us. However, God was miraculously sustaining Moses and Elijah, and He likely did this through Jesus as well.

As Moses is reflective of the law and Elijah is reflective of the prophets, each requiring God’s miraculous hand to sustain them, we are seeing Jesus, the fulfillment of the law and the prophets, being sustained by the power of God in Christ to carry Him through what the law and prophets anticipated.

Life application: It is a common question for people to ask if fasting is required for believers. The answer must be, “No.” Though it is referred to in Scripture, and even though Jesus speaks of it as something that was commonly done, His words were to Israel, under the law. As such, those verses cannot be considered prescriptive for the church.

Likewise, in Acts, fasting is mentioned, but Acts is a descriptive account of what was occurring. It prescribes nothing. On the other hand, in the epistles – from where we are to derive our doctrine on such matters – fasting is never explicitly directed. It is mentioned once in 1 Corinthians 7:5 (in some manuscripts), but it is not a prescription. Rather, it is an allowance.

The other two times fasting is mentioned are in 2 Corinthians 6:5 and 11:27. Both are involuntary fasts. Paul was forced to fast because of a lack of food. Other than these three references, fasting is never addressed, and it is certainly not prescribed. As this is true, any fast you conduct – for whatever reason – is between you and the Lord, between you and your doctor, or between you and your spouse (as indicated in some manuscripts of 1 Corinthians 7:5).

If fasting is something that interests you, study up on it. A water diet, meaning a diet that consists of only drinking water for a set amount of time, is something that has benefitted many. The longest recorded water fast was by Angus Barbieri (1939 – 7 September 1990). He was a Scottish man who fasted for 382 days, from June 1965 to July 1966. He went from an immensely overweight and unhealthy person to a slimmed-down, healthy person in this manner. His fast, and many others, can be seen on YouTube or through general internet searches.

Study up on fasting, but: 1) It is not required according to a proper study of the New Testament. 2) It should never be mandated by a Christian leader. 3) If it is mandated by someone, you should consider not fellowshipping with that person any longer as this may lead to a form of tyrannical authoritarian leadership. 4) You will have to give up bacon. In the end, the pluses and minuses must be personally weighed.

Lord God, may our doctrine be set based on what Your word prescribes when taken in the proper context of what is being said. Help us to not get caught up in strange teachings that have nothing to do with a close and personal relationship with You. Instead, may we hold fast to Your word and be sound in our thinking in all ways. Amen.

Prickly pear flower.

Wednesday, 11 September 2024

Then Jesus was led up by the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted by the devil. Matthew 4:1

Note: You can listen to today’s commentary courtesy of our friends at “Bible in Ten” podcast. (Click Here to listen)

You can also read this commentary, scrolling with music, courtesy of our friends at “Discern the Bible” on YouTube. (Click Here to listen), or at Rumble (Click Here to listen).

“Then Jesus, He was led up into the desolate by the Spirit to be tested by the Traducer” (CG).

Matthew 4 begins with the temptation of Christ. However, this is not to be disassociated from what was just presented, as evidenced by the beginning word “then.” Jesus left Galilee, His home of many years to be baptized by John. This was to fulfill all righteousness.

The law set forth precepts to be followed. That included following the words of God’s prophets who spoke on His behalf. This can be inferred from the words of Deuteronomy where false prophets were to be ignored. If this is so, then true prophets were to be acknowledged and heeded.

Jesus came to heed the call of the prophet. In His baptism, the Holy Spirit came upon Him and the voice from the heavens acknowledged that Jesus was His Son and that He stood approved of God. With that divine approbation acknowledged, Jesus now begins His ministry.

However, as judgment begins at the house of God, Jesus’ ministry begins with a time of testing. That is what is now seen at the opening of Matthew 4 where it says, “Then Jesus, He was led up into the desolate.”

As seen in Chapter 3, the word describing the area is an adjective, even if it expresses a noun. To retain the form of an adjective, “desolate” rather than “wilderness” is used. Regardless, in Scripture, such an area is considered a place of testing as well as one that can (and should) result in a closeness to God.

Without the distractions of the world of man, one can more fully commune with his Creator and contemplate his position and purpose before God. This leading was “by the Spirit.” Mark’s gospel uses a more forceful term, saying Jesus was essentially driven by the Spirit into the desolate.

This area of Judea is especially barren, and walking through it, even for a day, is challenging for the mind and body. The testing Jesus was to endure would be great, and His reliance on God would be absolutely paramount. This was because He was “to be tested.”

The word is peirazó from peira; to test (objectively). HELPS Word Studies says, “‘The word means either test or tempt’ (WP, 1, 348). Context alone determines which sense is intended, or if both apply simultaneously.”

Almost all translations say “tempted.” Only the SLT uses “tried.” There is temptation involved in this testing, but this is a test or a trial more than anything else. The temptation will come after an extended period of fasting.

Thus, the entire time is to be considered, not merely the temptations at the end of it, even if the point of waiting is to lure Jesus with temptations. This translation is more likely because of what it says in Luke 4:13 –

“Now when the devil had ended every temptation, he departed from Him until an opportune time.”

The time is one of looking for a weakness that can later be exploited. It was just said by the voice from heaven that Jesus is the One “in whom I approved.” He is now being tested in this capacity, just as Adam was tested concerning obeying his Creator in the garden. As for Jesus, this period of testing is set to be conducted “by the Traducer.”

The word is an adjective, diabolos, devilish. However, being preceded by the definite article, a noun form becomes necessary to make a separation between its uses without the article. Vincent’s Word Studies says –

“The word means calumniator, slanderer. It is sometimes applied to men, as to Judas (John 6:70); in 1 Timothy 3:11 (slanderers); and in 2 Timothy 3:3, and Titus 2:3 (false accusers). In such cases never with the article. The Devil, Satan, the god of this world (ὁ διάβολος [ho diabolos]), is always with the article and never plural. This should be distinguished from another word, also wrongly rendered devil in the A. V. – δαίμων [diamon], and its more common neuter form δαιμόνιον [diamonin], both of which should be translated demon, meaning the unclean spirits which possessed men, and were cast out by Christ and his apostles.”

As for the translation, the use of “devil” is almost universal. But that is a transliteration. As noted, the word is not a name. Rather, it has a meaning. Vincent’s says “calumniator” or “slanderer.” Strong’s says, “a traducer.” Traduce means “to expose to shame or blame by means of falsehood and misrepresentation.”

The difference between slander and traduce is that traduce stresses the resulting humiliation and distress of a victim. This is closer to the role of the devil. As noted, being an adjective, a literal translation would be “the devilish,” but to set this entity apart from others who may be devilish, using a capitalized noun appears to give the best sense – the Traducer.

Life application: There are times when following the herd mentality is seen in translations. There may be only one translation that deviates from what every other translation says. It may be that this is an entirely wrong translation, but it may be that following the herd was the easiest path to take for all the others.

Be careful not to accept a translation just because it is different, but be sure not to reject it for this reason as well. See if a commentary exists that may give a clue as to why there are differences. In the end, you will only get out of your time in God’s word what you put into it.

Enjoy what He has given, revel in the detail, and consider each passage as to how it fits into the surrounding context. This word is a sacred treasure passed on to us as it flowed forth from the mind of God. Rejoice in it! And above all, rejoice in the One who has given it to us. God – Father, Son, and Holy Spirit – has blessed us with this word. Thank You, O God, for it!

Yes, Lord God, we are grateful to You for Your kind hand of blessing. You have created us, redeemed us, and have given us Your word to understand how it all came about. Thank You, above all, for Jesus, the Subject of this precious word. Hallelujah and Amen.

Aestheticus Ethix. Nice birdy.

Tuesday, 10 September 2024

And suddenly a voice came from heaven, saying, “This is My beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.” Matthew 3:17

Note: You can listen to today’s commentary courtesy of our friends at “Bible in Ten” podcast. (Click Here to listen)

You can also read this commentary, scrolling with music, courtesy of our friends at “Discern the Bible” on YouTube. (Click Here to listen), or at Rumble (Click Here to listen).

To read the Superior Word translation of Matthew 3, please go to this link on YouTube, (Click here to listen), or this link on Rumble, (Click here to listen). 

“And behold! A voice out of the heavens, saying, ‘This is My Son – the Beloved in whom I approved’” (CG).

In the previous verse, after being immersed, Jesus came up from the water. When He did, He saw the Spirit of God descending and coming upon Him. The narrative now continues with, “And behold! A voice out of the heavens.”

This is the first of three times that a voice comes in this manner. The other two instances are at the Transfiguration and again during Jesus’ week of Passion –

“While he was still speaking, behold, a bright cloud overshadowed them; and suddenly a voice came out of the cloud, saying, ‘This is My beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased. Hear Him!’” Matthew 17:5

“Now My soul is troubled, and what shall I say? ‘Father, save Me from this hour’? But for this purpose I came to this hour. ^28 ‘Father, glorify Your name.’
Then a voice came from heaven, saying, ‘I have both glorified it and will glorify it again.’
²⁹ Therefore the people who stood by and heard it said that it had thundered. Others said, ‘An angel has spoken to Him.’” John 12:27-29

As for the plural, heavens, it is a common Hebrew expression that is found throughout Scripture, even from Genesis 1:1. God is in His heaven. Man is on earth with the skies, the heavens, above him. In this case God’s voice thus extends from the heavenly realm through to the earthly realm, summed up in the term “heavens.” Of the words of the Father, He was “saying, ‘This is My Son.’”

The issue of sonship in Scripture can be complex. The word can mean one naturally generated from another, as when a father begets a son. It can mean someone adopted as a son, such as Israel is declared to be in Exodus 4:22 –

“Then you shall say to Pharaoh, ‘Thus says the Lord: “Israel is My son, My firstborn.”’”

A son can also be a descriptor, such as, “He is the son of a fool.” It would mean that he is like a fool, not that his mother or father was literally a fool. The term son can also mean a person in a relational aspect regardless of actual family ties, such as when Paul says, “To Timothy, a true son in the faith” (1 Timothy 1:2). And so forth.

In this case, the Father is proclaiming that Jesus is His Son in a literal sense. Matthew 1:18 has already said that Jesus was conceived of the Holy Spirit. He has no human Father. As God the Father has proclaimed Jesus is His Son, it would be hard to come to any other conclusion than that He literally means Jesus is begotten of Him.

In the case of Exodus 4:22, it is clear that Israel is a nation and a group of people. Thus, the term “son” is to be taken metaphorically. There is nothing to assume that God is speaking in metaphor here. With that stated, He continues with, “the Beloved.”

The word is agapétos, beloved. The word is consistently used in the gospels to refer to Jesus. So strong is this connection that Cambridge notes, “In late Greek it is nearly interchangeable with ‘only-begotten.’” There is a filial bond that is being expressed in these words, calling out for the reader to understand the intimate connection between the two.

Having said that, the same word immediately takes on a new tone in the epistles where it is used again and again when referring to the relation that is established between God and saved believers and between believers in Christ. For example –

“Therefore be imitators of God as dear [agapétos] children.” Ephesians 5:1

“Therefore, my beloved [agapétos], as you have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling.” Philippians 2:12

Lastly, the voice from the heavens declares, “in whom I approved.” It is a compound word eudokeó, signifying “good or well” and “to think.” Thus, it signifies to approve of something. Strong’s says it especially signifies to approbate, meaning a formal or legal approval or agreement to something.

In this case, God has formally sent forth His Son to accomplish the redemption of man. Jesus is the chosen instrument to overcome the works of the Devil and to restore man to Himself. When the work is accomplished, it will be a formal, legal matter that is once and for all time resolved.

Life application: Although the words in this verse, when united with other verses seen so far, don’t prove the Trinity, they certainly allude to it. As noted, in Matthew 1:18, it said that Mary was with Child of the Holy Spirit, who is God.

As things reproduce after their own kind, it is understood that Jesus is thus God and Man. Here in verse 3:17, it is seen that Jesus is the Son of the Father. The voice is not the same manifestation as that of the Spirit because the Spirit descended upon Jesus and yet the voice is from the heavens.

In other words, the text is showing us a distinction between the three, and yet they are each God. As there is One God and God is One (Romans 3:30 and Galatians 3:20), then either the Bible is a confused book that is giving us a faulty presentation of God or there is a Godhead and within that Godhead there are three distinct Persons that comprise the One God.

The Bible doesn’t provide any other options. Explanations conjured up by cults that deviate from this recognizable presentation of God have various reasons for doing so. However, their presentations do not properly align with what is clearly seen in Scripture.

Whether you have a full understanding of the Trinity or not, it is important to recognize that this is what the Bible reveals. We do not need to understand something in its entirety to believe it. Faith involves accepting what we know to be true even if we do not fully grasp it. Have faith in the doctrine of the Trinity. It is how God has presented Himself to us because it is how God is.

Heavenly Father, we will certainly be searching out Your goodness and Your being for eternity. No matter how long we look to You, there will always be something new revealed to us. Thank You for Jesus who has made this possible. We have restoration through Him. Now eternity in Your presence is assured. Thank You, O God. Amen.

Jade Plant.

Monday, 9 September 2024

When He had been baptized, Jesus came up immediately from the water; and behold, the heavens were opened to Him, and He saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove and alighting upon Him. Matthew 3:16

Note: You can listen to today’s commentary courtesy of our friends at “Bible in Ten” podcast. (Click Here to listen)

You can also read this commentary, scrolling with music, courtesy of our friends at “Discern the Bible” on YouTube. (Click Here to listen), or at Rumble (Click Here to listen).

“And having been immersed, Jesus immediately ascended from the water. And behold! The heavens – they were opened to Him, and He saw the Spirit of God descending as a dove and coming upon Him” (CG).

Jesus just explained to John that His being immersed was fitting for them to fulfill all righteousness. With that, John immersed him. Next, it says, “And having been immersed, Jesus immediately ascended from the water.”

The words, like in Acts 8:38, 39 are almost immaturely argued over. Some adamantly state that the words “ascended from the water” refer to Jesus’ ascending from the act of immersion, arising out of the water. Others argue that it is speaking of ascending out of the river itself and that John could have simply sprinkled Jesus. In other words, “Jesus descended from the banks of the Jordan, stood in front of John who then sprinkled Him, and then Jesus ascended to the banks of the Jordan.”

The reason for this type of argumentation is to either “prove” or “disprove” one’s preferred method of what today is known as “baptism.” The argument, however, ignores the fundamental point of baptism. It also ignores the original meaning of the word. The purpose of baptism was a symbolic thorough cleansing from one’s past life. Only immersion provides the proper symbolism.

The meaning of baptizó is “to immerse.” Sprinkling fits neither the purpose nor the meaning. The Greek word rhantizó, used four times in Hebrews, signifies “to sprinkle.” The cognate noun rhantismos, which signifies “a sprinkling,” is used in Hebrews and 1 Peter 1:2.

Jesus went to John who was immersing in the Jordan. John immersed Jesus. From there He then either ascended out of the immersion or out of the Jordan, “And behold! The heavens – they were opened to Him.”

There is debate about who “Him” is referring to, John or Jesus. The reason for this is that in John 1, it says –

“And John bore witness, saying, ‘I saw the Spirit descending from heaven like a dove, and He remained upon Him. ³³ I did not know Him, but He who sent me to baptize with water said to me, “Upon whom you see the Spirit descending, and remaining on Him, this is He who baptizes with the Holy Spirit.”’ ³⁴ And I have seen and testified that this is the Son of God.” John 1:32-34

Thus, it is possible it is referring to John who is then the one to confirm Jesus as the Messiah. However, Jesus is the nearest antecedent in the account –

“And having been immersed, Jesus immediately ascended from the water. And behold! The heavens – they were opened to Him.”

Unless there is a compelling reason to change the referent, it is best to assume the nearest antecedent continues to be the subject. John’s having seen the same manifestation of the Spirit doesn’t change anything. It simply means that they both saw the same event. Understanding this, and most likely continuing to speak of Jesus, it says, “and He saw the Spirit of God descending as a dove.”

This does not mean that the Holy Spirit took on an actual form, as if He was incarnate. Rather, this is a manifestation of the Spirit through the creation. Just as God elsewhere is said to display His voice as thunder, creation is used to display the effects of God. As for the descent “as a dove,” that could mean “in the form” of a dove, or “in the manner” of a dove. The former is correct based on Luke 3 –

“When all the people were baptized, it came to pass that Jesus also was baptized; and while He prayed, the heaven was opened. ²² And the Holy Spirit descended in bodily form like a dove upon Him, and a voice came from heaven which said, ‘You are My beloved Son; in You I am well pleased.’” Luke 3:21, 22

Concerning the significance of the dove, innumerable claims are made. One is that the dove represents the Holy Spirit. This is, of course, based upon the account of Jesus’ baptism and, possibly, a misapplication of the words of Genesis 1:2 where the Spirit “brooded” over the face of the waters. However, one would have to assume the dove is specifically being referred to. Others see the dove as a symbol of Israel. Thus, this is signifying that Jesus is the true fulfillment of what Israel signifies. The uses of the dove in the Old Testament do not appear to bear that out.

The Greek word is peristera. It can refer to a dove or pigeon. It doesn’t tell us much, especially because what the word is derived from is unknown. Rather, the symbolism must be based upon the many uses of the yonah, or dove, in the Old Testament. This would include the man Yonah, or Jonah.

The word yonah is probably derived from the same as yayin, wine. Thus, there will be a great deal of similarity to be drawn from the two, something that is too long for this commentary. A possible root, or at least a cognate word, is yanah, a word that generally signifies doing wrong to someone. In Leviticus 19:33 we read this –

“And if a stranger dwells with you in your land, you shall not mistreat [yanah] him.”

This then stands in accord with the phrase, “Love him as you love yourself,” in the next verse of Leviticus. As noted, a word closely associated to yonah is yayin, or wine. That gives the sense of effervescence. Thus, by implication, intoxication.

Taking these thoughts and considering them in relation to the various uses of the word dove throughout the Old Testament, the dove’s symbolism can be summed up with the words, “mourning love.”

When the Holy Spirit descended upon Christ, it was certainly with the thought of mourning in mind. He was about to begin His earthly ministry, one which would be fraught with sadness, pain, punishment, and death. And yet, there is the absolute love of God being expressed in and through the incarnation of Jesus Christ. This is the general idea of what is being conveyed as the Holy Spirit was descending as a dove “and coming upon Him.”

The moment of the beginning of Christ’s earthly ministry is realized in this. Unlike an inanimate object that follows a single, directed path, Christ Jesus is set to wander about in His humanity. And yet, He will remain on the set path of following God’s will as He chooses to reject the temptations of human existence and to be perfectly obedient to the will of His Father in heaven. His moral compass will never deviate from this ideal perfection of the human will.

Life application: Although immersion has already been reviewed, the commentary above gives additional information to help solidify the notion that sprinkling is not what is intended when the Lord commands baptism in Matthew 28. Rather, if a person is sprinkled, that is not a baptism, it is a rhantism.

If Jesus wanted His people rhantized, He would have said so. But He commanded that they be baptized. Words have meaning. To change the meaning of a word from its original context is to form a pretext.

When we use the word repent, it should be used in the biblical context of “to change the mind.” Now that the word has evolved in English to mean “actively turn from sin,” it no longer means what the Bible originally intended. Rather, one is to reconsider the path he is on. Actively turning from sin may be a healthy result of reconsideration, but that is not what reconsideration means.

Using the word baptize no longer carries the original meaning as it once did. Thus, saying immerse is far preferable to get the sense. Be aware of the evolving nature of languages. In understanding how they change, you can properly modify your thinking about what the Bible is saying, and your doctrine will be more properly aligned with what God intended all along.

Heavenly Father, thank You for the safeguarding of the original languages in which the Bible was first presented to Your people. Even thousands of years later, we can know what was originally intended in words that are no longer even used because we have all of that stored up information. And thank You for those who have carefully protected this knowledge throughout the ages. Praises to You, O God, for this precious and unchanging word. Amen.

Oak branch with wind bells.

Sunday, 8 September 2024

But Jesus answered and said to him, “Permit it to be so now, for thus it is fitting for us to fulfill all righteousness.” Then he allowed Him. Matthew 3:15

Note: You can listen to today’s commentary courtesy of our friends at “Bible in Ten” podcast. (Click Here to listen)

You can also read this commentary, scrolling with music, courtesy of our friends at “Discern the Bible” on YouTube. (Click Here to listen), or at Rumble (Click Here to listen).

“And Jesus, having answered, said unto him, ‘Permit now, for thus it is fitting for us to fulfill all righteousness.’ Then he permits Him.” (CG).

In the previous verse, John had tried to prevent Jesus from being immersed by him and said that rather he needed a baptism from Jesus. However, Matthew next records, “And Jesus, having answered, said unto him, ‘Permit now.’”

The Greek bears emphasis on the word “now.” The moment is being highlighted and set aside as an important point upon which John was to comply. Things would be different as time continued to unfold, but the immediate time bore its own particular significance and need. John’s immersion was one of reconsideration. People were asked to change their minds about their position before God. Jesus did not need to do this.

As the people were immersed, they confessed their sins. Jesus did not need to do this. John, having observed Jesus’ life, knew this. But yet, He had come to be baptized, saying, “for thus it is fitting for us to fulfill all righteousness.”

Notice the plural word “us.” This was not something laid solely upon John, nor was it something that only pertained to Jesus. There is a sense of corporate need.

Where was it that the Jews normally went to confess their sins? They went to the temple, taking along a sacrifice as mandated by the law. Who did they go to? They went to the priests who ministered the law before God. The system was designed for this by God, and it was brought forth through the hand of Moses.

Along with any individual confessions of sin, there were various sacrifices each day, month, and annually. On the Day of Atonement, all the people were to refrain from work and to afflict their souls. There is nothing in the law that says, “When the Messiah comes, He will be exempt from the statutes, rules, and ordinances of this law.”

John was called as a prophet, but he was also called to have the people turn from their wicked ways and redirect their lives. Rote observance of the rituals of the temple did not change the inner man. However, they were required by law and the people were to submit to them. These were all ministered by the priests. John was of the priestly class, being a son of Zechariah.

If Jesus was required to observe the rituals of the law, and if God had called John to supplement those rituals with the people’s inward reconsideration of their ways along with an outward demonstration of that reconsideration, meaning immersion, then it was right for Jesus to submit to this ordinance as well.

On the Day of Atonement, He had no need for atonement, but being born under the law, He had a need to observe the day accordingly. With John’s immersion, the same need existed to fulfill all righteousness, meaning those things which God had ordained.

A true prophet of God under the law called forth the will of God in accordance with the law. Jesus understood this and He has informed John that He acknowledges John’s authority and position, including his status as a priest who administers before God in relation to the sins of the people, even if they had not committed a particular sin or any sin at all.

To understand this more fully, Leviticus 4:13 begins the section of corporate guilt by the congregation –

“Now if the whole congregation of Israel sins unintentionally, and the thing is hidden from the eyes of the assembly, and they have done something against any of the commandments of the Lord in anything which should not be done, and are guilty.” Leviticus 4:13

Israel was a corporate body as well as a nation of individuals. Jesus could not disassociate Himself from the nation’s corporate guilt just because He was the Messiah. All righteousness demanded that Jesus enter into John’s baptism regardless of His personal state before God.

As for the word prepó, translated as “fitting,” HELPS Word Studies defines it, saying it “refers to acting appropriately in a particular situation, i.e. as it is seemly to God and therefore ‘conspicuous amongst others; hence eminent, distinguished. . . seemly fit.’”

Jesus is identifying Himself as a person of Israel, born under the law and who was required to observe the law, just as any other Israelite was required to do. Whether John fully grasped everything Jesus’ words meant or not, it next says, “Then he permits Him.”

John submitted to Jesus’ submission. Thus, as a member of the priestly class of the law and also the prophet called to return Israel to the right road before God, his immersion included conducting that rite on the One who Created Him, gave Moses the law, and who would fulfill that same law. Astonishing.

Life application: Jesus. All hail the name of Jesus!

Heavenly Father, we come today to hail the great and exalted name of Jesus Christ our Lord. Hallelujah and Amen.