Baptism in Matthew and Mark

S. Joel Garver

In the following essay I will examine some of the New Testament materials concerning baptism, using especially the Gospel narratives of Matthew and Mark in which to situate the early church's theology and practice.¹ The stories of John the Baptizer and Jesus, however, must be read within the twin horizons of their Old Testament background and of their original audience.

When John, Jesus, and the early church used water in ritual and symbolic actions, they did so within the already existent symbolic world of Judaism with its stories of floods and water-crossings, its rituals of washing and purification, and its prophecies of the outpoured Spirit and deserts made green. Thus their actions can be seen as dramatic re-readings of the Old Testament narratives which function, as we shall see, to bring Israel's own story to its climax, inaugurating the reign of YHWH.² And when the first hearers of the Gospels listened to the narratives of John and Jesus they did so as a baptized and baptizing community, gathered by the Spirit in the name of Jesus, the Messiah, as his kingdom. Thus the early Christian community was to understand that in baptism, the actions of John and Jesus in some sense continued, constituting YHWH's eschatological people.³

John's Baptism in General

Let us begin, then, with the Gospel accounts of the ministry of John the Baptizer. In whatever way one resolves the synoptic problem, it is still Mark's Gospel that begins where the Christian pilgrimage begins--with baptism.⁴ Mark writes, "The beginning of the good news of Jesus, the Messiah, the Son of God...John the Baptizer appeared in the wilderness, proclaiming a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins" (1:1, 4; cf. Mt 3; Lk 3:21-23). Through the testimony of Mark and the other Gospel writers, then, it is clear that the early church placed the beginning of Jesus' ministry within the context of John's baptism and, furthermore, Jesus himself identified John as the precursor of his own work (see Mk 11:27-33; Mt 11:2-19 and parallels).⁵ But what was the nature and origin of John's baptism and what was the significance of Jesus submitting himself to it? On these questions there is less clarity.

We will begin by considering what the synoptic Gospels tell us about John and what this would mean in the context of first-century Judaism. Regarding the following items the Gospels are unanimous: [1] John carried on his ministry in the wilderness, near the Jordan river; [2] his ministry was one of preaching and administering a baptism of repentance in the Jordan; [3] this baptism is associated with the confession and/or forgiveness of sins; [4] John's ministry led to the baptism of numerous people; [5] his ministry fulfilled the prophecy of Isaiah (40:3), "A voice crying in the wilderness, 'Prepare the way of the Lord, make his paths straight!'" and [6] John testified that, while he baptized with water, a greater one was coming who would baptize with the Holy Spirit.⁶ Whatever the historical precedents for John's baptism, it is within the nexus of these six items that the significance of that baptism must be interpreted. And among historical precedents, Old Testament washing will figure prominently. Before turning to the Old Testament, however, two other precedents, possibly contemporary to John, should be mentioned: initiatory washings at Qumran and Jewish proselyte baptism.

Various studies have traced a possible relation between certain initiatory washings practiced by the Qumran community and the baptisms of John and the early church.⁷ Moreover, the Qumran sect seems to have distinguished between an outward washing of the flesh with water, purifying one from ritual uncleanness, and a closely related inner washing by the Spirit of holiness, purifying one from the moral guilt of which ritual defilement was the outward manifestation (1QS 3:6-9). Nevertheless, this purification looked forward to an eschatological purification in which the Spirit of holiness would come like cleansing water to purify finally and perfectly, both inwardly and outwardly (1QS 4:18-22). Indeed, the Qumran community seems to have retreated to the wilderness precisely to await such an eschatological purification and to provide an already penitent and holy community, both to rival what they perceived as a corrupt Temple cult and to prepare for their own divine vindication.⁸

While these Qumran teachings have certain parallels in John's baptism (e.g., an association of ritual washing with repentance and forgiveness; an eschatological view towards a washing from the Spirit; a wilderness base of operations), these need not be explained in terms of John's dependence upon Qumran. For one thing, as we shall see, there is ample Old Testament background which could serve as a common source for the theology and practice of both John and Qumran.⁹

Furthermore, there are three significant discontinuities between Qumran and the baptism of John (and the early church). First, unlike Qumran's presumed practice, John's baptism was not self-administered. Second, while Qumran initiation was merely the first in a series of washings (see 1QS 3:4-6; 5:13; 6:18-23; etc.), it does not seem that John's baptism was repeatedly administered. Third, the Qumran washing likely held a place within a larger, complex, and multi-stage novitiate into a community (perhaps at the commencement of the second year).¹⁰ John's baptism, on the other hand, seems to have had little prerequisite.¹¹

Still, Qumran washing is not irrelevant to John's baptism. It does give us some insight into the symbolic world of first century Judaism, including the symbolic import of water, the possibility of water initiation, and the wilderness as a significant place to await eschatological fulfillment. It also demonstrates that is was a live possibility within the first century to adapt and apply the water rites of Judaism and the Temple in a meaningful way for purifications beyond the ritual requirements, for the marking out of a new community, and as a rival to the official religious authorities (as the Pharisees also did after their own fashion).¹² As we shall see, John's baptism held out similar meaning and hope.

Concerning Jewish proselyte baptism, my remarks shall be brief. While the origins and timing of the first such baptisms are a matter of considerable debate, it seems to me that the evidence generally points in the direction that they arose late in the first century, probably after the destruction of the Temple in AD 70, and certainly after the baptisms of John.¹³ Assuming that the development of Jewish proselyte baptism was not influenced by Christian baptism, it does serve as an independent witness of a water-washing rite being adapted in a Jewish context as an initiatory rite, marking a movement from one community to another. It does not, however, provide any direct illumination of John's baptism.

With this context and the hints it provides, we can now consider John's baptism itself. The elements of baptism, wilderness, Jordan, repentance, and forgiveness of sins--not to mention John's prediction of the greater one to come--all conspire to mark John's ministry as one of eschatological expectation, of judgment and vindication.¹⁴ While the image of the wilderness has multiple significations within first century Judaism, the most prominent recalled the desert journeys of Israel after the exodus from Egypt and prior to the conquest of the land, a conquest accomplished by first crossing the Jordan (Jos 3:7-4:24), an important feature to note in conjunction with John's ministry.¹⁵ The wilderness, however, is an image of trial and judgment as well, since most of Israel had once perished in the wilderness and did not enter the land (Nu 14:26-35; Dt 1:26-40; Ps 106:24-27).

More immediately for John's audience, however, these various elements serve as an image of renewed exile. If John is calling Israel back to the wilderness, it can only be for a new exodus; but then Israel must now be living in bondage to new oppressors. Surprisingly, perhaps, these oppressors do not appear to be Rome in John's mind, but the leadership of Israel herself. After all, what else could a washing of purification be, but a way of saying that Israel's God was now offering through John's ministry the purification and forgiveness that the Temple and other official rites had once promised?¹⁶

In this regard, it is also important to keep in mind that, against the backdrop of Old Testament promises, the "forgiveness of sins" which John announced is not so much an individual experience (though it is that), as it is a corporate event in redemptive history, an event that goes hand-in-hand with Israel's final return from exile (cf. Lev 26:27-45; Dt 30:1-10; Isa 40-55; Jer 31:31-34; 33:4-11; Eze 36:24-6, 33; Dan 9:16-19; etc.).¹⁷ Those being baptized, then, anticipate and begin to constitute nothing short of a renewed Israel with a renewed covenant. They are a replacement for the corrupt existing structures that stand under God's judgment as a new Egypt and Babylon.¹⁸ And when judgment comes, John's renewed community would be vindicated as the true people of YHWH, while their oppressors perished. In this sense, then, John prepares "the way of the Lord" who is soon to appear. This underscores the urgency of his message to individuals to turn back to their God ("repent") in order, through baptism, to be part of his forgiven and purified people, returned from exile.¹⁹

It also seems to me that not enough has been made of the significant fact that John's baptism was passive. Unlike most of the various ritual ablutions commonly practiced in Judaism--whether privately, at the Temple, among the Pharisees, or by the Qumran sect--John's baptism was not self-administered. Part of the precedent for this is, without doubt, the prophecies of the outpoured Spirit who will wash God's people clean (Eze 36:22-32; Isa 44:1-8). This was not a self-administered washing, but one accomplished by the initiative and agency of God's Spirit, a washing of which one's being baptized by another is a fitting symbol. Still, John is clear that he is not the one who will baptize with the Spirit, though his baptism anticipates and prepares for that one to come. Other precedents, however, remain.

Within the Torah (and whole Old Testament) there are only three water rites that are not self-administered: cleansing from contact with a corpse (Nu 19:1-22),²⁰ cleansing from leprosy (Lev 14:1-7),²¹ and the consecrating of Aaron and his sons as priests (Ex 29:4-9; Lev 8:6-9).²² While the first of these is essentially a water rite (though using water containing the ashes of the red heifer), in the latter two, the water rite is only the beginning of a larger ritual. The first two rites, however, are particularly important in the immediate context of John's baptism of repentance, involving, as they do, a transition from uncleanness to cleanness.²³

In the symbolic world of the Old Testament, such a transition is tantamount to a passage from death to life, at least ritually speaking. In first case--defilement by a corpse--the uncleanness is one that results from being literally touched by death (or at least brought close to its reality; Nu 19:11, 14, 16) and apart from cleansing will result in being "cut off" from YHWH's people (Nu 19:13, 20; cf. Ex 30:20).²⁴ In the other case--defilement by leprosy--the uncleanness brings about a condition of virtual living death: separation from the community and cultic life of YHWH's people (Lev 13:46), dwelling in the place of execution (Nu 15:35-36), and adopting the appearance of a mourner (torn clothes, unkempt hair, a covered face, crying out; Lev 13:45). Restoration through water, then, was also ritual resurrection.²⁵

But within later Judaism such resurrection typology had come to be closely associated with return from exile, purification from sin, and eschatological vindication--all themes we have seen already. Thus we read in Ezekiel:

I will sprinkle clean water upon you, and you shall be clean from all your uncleannesses, and from all your idols I will cleanse you. A new heart I will give to you, and a new spirit I will put within you; and I will remove from your body the heart of stone and give you a heart of flesh. I will put my Spirit within you, and make you follow my statutes and be careful to observe my ordinances. Then you shall live in the land that I gave to your ancestors; and you shall be my people and I will be your God. (36:25-28)

It is precisely in this context that we find Ezekiel's vision of a national resurrection and restoration of exiled Israel, graphically portrayed through the reconstitution and resuscitation of dry bones by the moist breath of the Spirit of YHWH (Eze 37:1-14). The dry bones represent Israel, slain earlier for her idolatry (Eze 6:1-6), now forgiven, cleansed, renewed, and, in later chapters, vindicated among her enemies (Eze 38-39) and restored to fellowship with her God in her land (Eze 40-48; cf. Isa 4 4:1-5).

This vision, therefore, was evidently constructed within the categories of the Torah's water rites, particularly those that cleanse from the defilements of leprosy and death. These defilements, then, have come to stand for Israel's sin and unfaithfulness resulting in ritual and actual death. Such a typology of sin as uncleanness is already apparent in the Torah itself (e.g., in the regulations regarding the purification offering, Lev 5:1-6) and comes to further expression in later literature (e.g., Zech 13:1). Thus the Psalmist writes,

Purge me with hyssop and I shall be clean;
wash me, and I shall be whiter than snow...
Hide your face from my sins,
and blot out all my iniquities.
Create in me a clean heart, O God,
and put a new and right spirit within me.
Do not cast me away from your presence,
and do not take your holy Spirit from me. (Ps 51:7, 9-12).

Here the purging with hyssop and its parallel, washing, function as shorthand for the entire rite for the cleansing of lepers, thus identifying sin as the true uncleanness of which leprosy is only an image.²⁶ And like the actual leprosy cleansing rite, the Psalm culminates with renewed fellowship with YHWH through offerings (Lev 14:1-32; Ps 51:16-19). It is earlier typologies of this sort that Ezekiel converts into a prophecy of national cleansing, resurrection, and restoration from exile.

This hope for national resurrection, however, came to be coupled with an equally strong hope for personal bodily resurrection. While such personal resurrection is already intimated in earlier writings (Job 19:25-27; Eze 37:1-14; Dan 12:1-2), it comes to full expression in later Second Temple literature (e.g., 2 Mac 7; 12:43-45; 1 En 51:1-5; 4 Ezra 7:32; etc.). Thus national, corporate resurrection of the covenant people is integrated with personal resurrection and both come to be identified together as YHWH's final vindication of his people.²⁷

In light of these considerations, John's baptism can be seen as an adaptation of the Torah's cleansing rites for contact with death and for leprosy, interpreted through the lens of eschatological expectation, and thereby confirming our earlier analysis. John's baptism not only anticipated the final outpouring of the Spirit, with its motifs of cleansing, forgiveness, restoration, and resurrection, it also prepared the way for it and did so in two ways.

First, his ministry stood as a witness against Israel and her Temple cult, portraying her not merely as in exile, but as unclean, leprous, and in a condition of ritual death, estranged from God. Moreover, the official channels of Temple and ritual had failed to provide the necessary cleansing and apparently were incapable of doing so (a point thrown into greater relief by John's priestly descent; Lk 1:5).²⁸

Second, John's ministry served as a proleptic purification and cleansing of Israel, calling her from death to life, and initially restoring her. All of this served as preparation for revived fellowship with her God, perfect renewal by the Spirit, and final vindication, at least for the faithful remnant who responded to John's message and escaped the coming judgment. Apparently, however, this resurrection of Israel, washed by the Spirit, would transpire only through the ministry of the greater one to come, a figure that the Gospels identify with Jesus.²⁹

The Baptism of Jesus

In commenting upon "one baptism for the remission of sins," Calvin denies that "one baptism" merely means that a Christian is only to be baptized once. Rather it points to the unity of all Christians in receiving the one and same baptism, a baptism they share with Jesus himself. Calvin writes that Jesus "consecrated and sanctified baptism in his own body in order that he might have it in common with us as the firmest bond of the union and fellowship he has deigned to form with us."³⁰ This, it seems to me, is a helpful perspective in which to consider John's baptism of Jesus.

When we consider the synoptic Gospels against the horizon of the original audience, it seems reasonable that one of the primary purposes of relating the narrative of Jesus' baptism is to instruct its hearers about the meaning of their own baptisms and their solidarity with the Messiah in being baptized.³¹ While some commentators suggest that John's baptism of Jesus would have proved an embarrassment to the early church--given that it was a baptism of repentance for forgiveness--it seems to me that such a view fails to take account of the perspective upon John's baptism that I have already outlined.³² Instead, I would urge that the Gospels present the inception of Jesus' public ministry in the context of John's baptism precisely to show that Jesus is its eschatological fulfillment. In sharing baptism with Jesus as the Messiah, the Gospels writers are thus indicating that their audience participates in that same eschatological reality.

Jesus' baptism, then, need not be seen as a matter of his own personal repentance and forgiveness. As we have seen, the categories of repentance and forgiveness forcefully speak of return from exile and corporate restoration, especially in the context of John's ministry. Moreover, John's baptism indicated that this hope of return and restoration was unavailable to Israel in herself, or through the Temple cult, since she had become a new Egypt and Babylon. Therefore, in light of this, we do well to see Jesus' baptism as his identification with Israel's hope and the means by which he embodies, in his own person, what Israel could not accomplish for herself. Through his baptism and ministry, Jesus himself becomes Israel's restoration, culminating in his own resurrection by which he became, in the middle of history, what Israel hoped to become at history's end--a resurrected, vindicated, and restored humanity.³³ Each Gospel writer presents his own perspective upon this basic outlook, but we shall focus on the accounts of Matthew and Mark.

Jesus' Baptism in Matthew

In terms of overall literary structure and motifs, it is likely that in Matthew's Gospel, Jesus Messiah, son of David, is being presented in the guise of a new Moses.³⁴ Jesus is introduced as the one who will "save his people from their sins" (Mt 1:21), but given the beginning of the Gospel, this has, from the start, a very specific connotation.³⁵ By dividing the genealogy of Jesus into three sets of fourteen generations, Matthew calls attention to three decisive moments: the call of Abraham, the reign of David, and the exile (Mt 1:1, 17). The allusions to Abraham and David invoke significant promises in regard to the land (Ge 12:1-3; 15:18-21; 17:1-8) and to the Messianic king (2 Sa 7:1-17), promises that are rendered problematic given that Matthew's third set of generations appears to leave Israel in exile (Mt 1:11-12, 17). In addition, since three sets of fourteen are also six sets of seven, he intimates that with the birth of Jesus as Messiah, something new, final, and climactic is about to emerge--a seventh generational set.³⁶ Thus, if this Messiah will indeed "save his people from their sins," he will do so particularly as someone who leads them out of their exile, that is, as a new Moses leading a new exodus.

This Mosaic theme is carried throughout the rest of the book as well. The book begins where the books of Moses begin: "an account of the genealogy" (Mt 1:1; Gk: biblos geneseos), as easily translated, "the book of Genesis" or "the book of the generation" (cf. Ge 2:4; 5:1; 6:9; 10:1; etc.). Moreover, toward the beginning of Jesus' public ministry we find him expounding the Torah with authority upon a mountain (Mt 5-7), just as YHWH had given the law from Sinai in Exodus (Ex 19-23). At the end of Jesus' ministry we again find him upon a mountain, now blessing his disciples and exhorting them to disciple the nations (Mt 28:16-20), just as Moses had blessed and exhorted Israel to conquer the land before climbing Nebo at the end of Deuteronomy (Dt 32:48-34:8).

In fact, Deuteronomy lies behind Matthew in other ways as well. The blessings that stand at the head of Jesus' message to Israel are matched by the "woes" that mark the end (compare Mt 5:3-11 with 23:13-33).³⁷ The prominent place of these features recalls the climax of Moses' great message, the proclamation of covenant sanctions to Israel: blessings if they obey, and curses if they do not (Dt 27-30). This also recalls the theme of exile since exile is the fullness of the curses that Moses announces for violation of the covenant. Nevertheless, Moses also promises that, even when Israel is exiled, if they "return to YHWH," then he will gather them once again and return them to their land (Dt 30:1-5). In a number of ways, then, Matthew presents Jesus as a new Moses leading his people to return to their God.³⁸

But Matthew's Jesus is not merely a new Moses. He also embodies the story of Israel in his own person and ministry, experiencing and accomplishing in himself what Israel herself needs in order to receive the blessings of the covenant. This, in part, explains Matthew's free use texts from the Old Testament, texts which appear to refer to Israel, and his application of them to Jesus (e.g., Mt 1:23 quoting Isa 7:14; Mt 2:15 quoting Hos 11:1; etc.). Given what we have seen above and in connection with John's baptism, Jesus' own forsakenness upon the cross, his death, and his resurrection, must be understood in terms of exile and restoration as the focal point of Israel's own story. As followers of Jesus (significantly, Greek for "Joshua") his disciples will forever take possession of the promised land, no longer confined to Palestine, but encompassing all nations.³⁹ In this way, then, Matthew's audience must understand that if they wish to experience this same restoration, resurrection, and blessing--this new exodus--they too must follow Jesus.

It is within this context that Matthew's account of Jesus' baptism must be contemplated. If Jesus is a new Moses and the true Israel called out of Egypt (Mt 2:15), then his baptism must especially be interpreted in light of Moses and Israel crossing the Red Sea.⁴⁰ Matthew places Jesus' baptism in the context of John's ministry and, therefore, as we have seen, in the context of a disobedient Israel in exile, under the discipline of YHWH, in need of deliverance. Even the Pharisees and Sadducees cannot rely upon their Abrahamic descent for deliverance from eschatological wrath and need to "bear fruit worthy of repentance" (Mt 3:7-12). Jesus, however, comes as Abraham's son to be baptized--that is, as a new Israel, God's own son whom he delivered from Egypt (Mt 2:15; 3:17; cf. Ex 4:21-23; Jer 3:19; 31:9, 20; Hos 11:1). He received John's baptism in order to "fulfill all righteousness" and in this way is revealed as the one in whom the Father is "well pleased" (Mt 1:1; 3:15-17), a significant contrast with Israel in whom YHWH was not pleased and who perished in the wilderness (Nu 14:26-35; Ps 95:7-11).⁴¹

Thus Jesus' baptism by John marks the inception of his public ministry, a ministry in which all righteousness is to be fulfilled. In this setting, Jesus' Sermon on the Mount is not to be read so much as an exhortation for his disciples to pull themselves up by their moral bootstraps, as it is a exposition of whom Jesus himself is. As the one who has come to "fulfill" all the law and the prophets (Mt 5:17), it is Jesus himself whose "righteousness exceeds that of the scribes and Pharisees" and thus is able to "enter the reign of heaven" (Mt 5:20). Likewise, Jesus is the blessed one described in the Beatitudes (Mt 5:3-11), who will receive the blessings that the Torah had promised (e.g., "the meek...shall inherit the land," Mt 5:5), but which it was unable to grant due to Israel's disobedience.

Furthermore, the "Spirit of God" came upon Jesus at his baptism (Mt 3:16). In light of the exodus pattern, the descent of the Spirit, like a dove, takes up the symbolism of the eagle-winged Shekinah leading Israel across the Red Sea (Ex 13:21-22; 14:19-25; 19:4; Dt 32:11-12; cf. 1 Co 10:1-2).⁴² Also, as the Shekinah led Israel into the wilderness, so too the Spirit led Jesus there (Mt 4:1). This imagery of the Spirit carries through Matthew's Gospel in various ways. In the context of Jesus' healing ministry, Matthew uniquely quotes the prophet Isaiah (Mt 12:15-21), "Behold my servant hom I have chosen, my beloved with whom my soul is well pleased. I will put my Spirit upon him..." (Isa 42:1; the echoes of Jesus' baptism should be obvious). In the original context, this is a prophecy concerning Israel, personified as God's servant, now restored from exile and establishing justice among the nations (Isa 42-43). Thus the typology of Jesus' whole ministry is one that is carried out under the aegis of the Spirit as the renewed Israel of God.⁴³

In this manner, Jesus' baptism not only begins his ministry, but remains also as a sign over his entire ministry, marking him as the one in whom the Father is well pleased and to whom he grants the promised restoration through the Spirit. Thus when Jesus is finally condemned by Israel's hierarchy (the climax of their own disobedience), deserted by his disciples (the failure of even the remnant), and forsaken by God, this is not the end. As the one who embodied Israel's own story, Jesus suffered her exile in his passion and death (as Moses died upon Nebo). Nevertheless, as the righteous one in whom the Father was well pleased, Jesus completed his exodus in the resurrection (as Joshua entered the promised land). And so, Jesus' baptism-as a sign of restoration from exile and a new exodus--encompasses his entire ministry and work from the Jordan to his resurrection.

It is within this narrative typology of exodus and conquest, of exile and return, that Matthew's audience could understand their own baptisms as followers of Jesus. First of all, Jesus' last words in Matthew instruct his disciples to carry his baptism forward into the whole world as the promised land (Mt 28:19).⁴⁴ Second, baptism makes disciples, setting apart all who believe that Israel's own story was brought to its climax in the story of Jesus and incorporating them into that very story. Third, through baptism they become part of the restored and resurrected Israel of God, YHWH's own son, led by Jesus as their Moses and Joshua, endowed with the Spirit, those in whom the Father is well pleased.⁴⁵ Finally, to follow Jesus in this way means not merely to acknowledge what he has already done, but, just as importantly, to fulfill all righteousness themselves, taking up the cross and losing their own lives (Mt 10:38-39). Matthew, therefore, does not view baptism as a onetime event, but as a sign under which one's whole life is to be lived.

Excursus: Paul and the Baptismal Exodus

It is this very same image of the exodus that is employed in the Pauline writings in reference to baptism and to much the same effect. In Romans Paul speaks early on of God's promise to Abraham to inherit, not simply the land of Palestine, but indeed the whole world (Ro 4:13).⁴⁶ The promise to Abraham, however, comes in the context of exile, bondage, and exodus (Ge 15:5-16; cf. Ro 4). And so, Paul later takes up this theme as well, exhorting his hearers as the "children of God" who, led by the Spirit (the new Torah; Ro 8:3), must not fall back into slavery, but enter into the promised inheritance as fellow heirs with the Messiah (Ro 8:12-17).⁴⁷ This recalls the wilderness wanderings of Israel and countenances Jesus as having already received the promised inheritance.

But how did Paul's audience make their exodus out of slavery to sin? This liberation is explained in between the two passages we have already considered (esp. in 6:16-23). In this context, however, it is baptism that "becomes the Exodus moment, the equivalent of the Red Sea for the renewed people of God."⁴⁸ Since Jesus, as Messiah, already is the passover and exodus in his death and resurrection (cf. 1 Co 5:7), those who want to share in that deliverance must be identified with him in baptism. Thus Paul writes, "we have been buried with him by baptism into death, so that, just as Messiah was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, so we too might walk in newness of life" (Ro 6:4). Baptism is associated not only with vindication (justification; Ro 5:12-21), but also with new life (sanctification; Ro 6:1-23).

Similarly, in 1 Corinthians Paul writes, "our ancestors were all under the cloud, and all passed through the sea, and all were baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea, and all ate the same spiritual food, and all drank the same spiritual drink" (10:2-4). Paul evidently takes these Old Testament events and, not only interprets them in terms of Christian symbols, but also sees them as types of Christian symbols, "as examples for us" (10:6). Thus he writes later in very similar terms, "just as the body is one and has many members...so it is with Messiah, for in the one Spirit we were all baptized into one body...and we were all made to drink of one Spirit" (12:12-13). Once again, baptism is presented in terms of the exodus and Jesus is manifest as the Israel of God, the one with whom all Christians together share baptism as corporate Messiah (Christus totus).⁴⁹ Baptism is shared through the Spirit, the Shekinah who led Israel in the wilderness.

The exodus motif, however, also stands as a warning. In the case of Israel, "God was not pleased with most of them, and they were struck down in the wilderness" because of their idolatry, sexual immorality, and complaining (10:5-10). So Paul warns his hearers, "watch out that you do not fall" (10:12). This too parallels Matthew, indicating that while the sign of baptism is no guarantee of salvat ion, it does call those who receive it to follow Jesus as those in whom the Father is "well pleased," fulfilling all righteousness. After all, as Paul intimates, following Jesus is "the way out [of temptation] so that you may be able to endure it" (10:13). In this manner, then, the themes we have seen in Matthew are echoed in Paul.

Jesus' Baptism in Mark

If Matthew presents Jesus to us as a new Moses, Mark portrays him as the Messianic king--a new David, and moreover, the son of God, that is, a new Solomon (cf. 2 Sa 7:12-14; Ps 110).⁵⁰ This motif is apparent in Mark's Gospel in several ways, but we shall take, as a starting point, the narrative of Herod's execution of John the Baptizer and Jesus' subsequent feeding of the five thousand (Mk 6:17-44).

Mark's Gospel is unique in drawing attention to Herod as "king" (6:14, 22, 25, 26, 27), the context of John's execution being a "banquet" (6:21), Jesus' compassion for the hungry crowds who seem to be "sheep without a shepherd" (6:34), and the greenness of the grass (6:39). By doing so, Mark narrates the two events, the execution and the feeding, as a contrast and sets them upon the background of Old Testament typology. In Ezekiel we read,

Thus says the Lord YHWH: Ah, shepherds of Israel who have been feeding yourselves! Should not shepherds feed the sheep? You eat the fat, you clothe yourselves with the wool, your slaughter the fatlings; but you do not feed the sheep...So they were scattered, because there was no shepherd...I am against the shepherds and I will rescue my sheep from their mouths, so that they may not be food for them. (Eze 34:2-3, 5, 10; cf. Jer 23:1-4)

Against this background, Mark's point is clear. Israel's kings were to be their shepherds, but Herod is a false "king" who, instead of feeding his sheep, devours them.⁵¹ This is particularly clear when, in the midst of a "banquet," Herod, at the prodding of his wife, has the head of John brought on a platter, as if the main course.⁵²

On the other hand, Jesus has compassion for the people since, in light of Herod's failure, they are "like sheep without a shepherd." He proceeds to feed them abundantly as they sit upon the green grass. Jesus' compassion and provision of food must also be read in light of Ezekiel's prophecy. There YHWH shows his compassion to the scattered sheep of Israel, promising to "rescue them from all the places to which they have been scattered" and to "feed them with good pasture...they shall lie down in good grazing land" (Eze 34:12, 14). Moreover, he promises to "set up over them, my servant David, and he shall feed them: he shall feed them and be their shepherd. And I, YHWH, will be their God, and my servant David shall be prince among them" (Eze 34:23-24; cf. Jer 23:5-6).⁵³ Through these two stories, then, Mark specifically portrays Jesus as this David figure, fulfilling the will of YHWH, and gathering the lost sheep of Israel out of exile, a Gospel theme we have already encountered.

These particular pericopae, however, are not the only places in which this Davidic theme is evident. Indeed, two of the most well known attributes of Mark's Gospel highlight this perspective. First, we can consider Mark's handling of the "messianic secret."⁵⁴ Time and again, Jesus attempts to conceal his identity from the public, even forbidding those to whom he has ministered from proclaiming it (Mk 1:34, 44; 3:12; 5:43; 7:36; 8:26, 30; 9:9). On the other hand, he repeatedly speaks and acts in such a way so as to reveal his messianic identity to his disciples, who, all the while, do not understand (Mk 4:11-12; 6:51-52; 7:19; 8:17-21). In the end, the public crucifies him (Mk 15:14) and every one of his closest followers deserts him (Mk 14:50).⁵⁵ Nevertheless, at several crucial points in the story, there is a momentary unveiling of Jesus' true identity:

...a voice came out of heaven, "You are my son, the beloved, in you I am well pleased.
Peter answered and said to him, "You are the Messiah."
...a voice came out of the cloud, "This is my son, the beloved; listen to him."
The high priest asked him and said to him, "You are the Messiah, the son of the blessed?"
When the centurion who was standing by saw how he breathed his last, he said, "Truly, this man was the son of God." (Mk 1:11; 8:29; 9:7; 14:61; 15:39)

While the first and third of these are divine revelations, the remaining are ambiguous and ironic: Peter does not understand his own confession, the high priest does not believe his own question, and only the Gentile centurion finally comes to confess what ought to have been Israel's faith.⁵⁶

But what is the meaning of Jesus' identity? The titles "Messiah" and "son of God" are both kingly and Davidic (cf. 1 Sa 7:14; Ps 2:7; 89:4, 26-27),⁵⁷ all the more so when paired together (as they are in Mk 1:1, which is programmatic for the entire Gospel).⁵⁸ Thus Jesus is revealed as the son of David, the one expected to rule over Israel and to rebuild her fallen house, even as Solomon had expanded Israel's borders and constructed her Temple (1 Ki 2; 4:24; 2 Ch 1-7). If this is the case, however, Jesus' entire ministry stands as a paradox. Not only does his ministry lack the expected trappings of kingship, but he also announces judgment upon Israel (rather than her restoration; Mk 13) and dies ignobly upon the cross (rather than taking a throne).⁵⁹

This brings us to the second well known attribute of Mark's Gospel--his presentation of Jesus as constantly moving "along the way" (Mk 1:2-3; 2:23; 3:1; etc., see esp. 10:17, 32, 52; etc.).⁶⁰ Mark's picture of Jesus is one of a man of action, emphasized by the use of the term "immediately" around forty times in this brief Gospel (Mk 1:12, 20, 21, 31; 2:8; etc.) and the absence of the frequent and long speeches that are recorded in the other Gospels. This too reveals Jesus as a Davidic figure--as David had repeatedly delivered his people, confronting their enemies (1 Sa 23; 2 Sa 2-10; 1 Ch 11-20), so Jesus ceaselessly rescues his people from illness and demonic possession, all the while challenging the corrupt leaders of Israel (Mk 1:25, 31-34; 2:16-17; etc.). As David had gathered mighty men to join his cause (1 Ch 11-12), so Jesus calls disciples to follow him on the way (Mk 1:16-20; 3:13-19). Moreover, as David had ruled as a king and Solomon had spoken with wisdom, so Jesus is portrayed as one having authority, the "more powerful one" who comes after John, healing and exorcising with power and teaching to the astonishment of the crowds (Mk 1:7, 22, 27; 2:10, 28; etc.).

Nevertheless, the paradoxical nature of Jesus' ministry is manifest. The "way" that Jesus follows, the very "way of YHWH" (Mk 1:2), leads to the cross, a fact his followers cannot comprehend. Furthermore, this "way" is the exercise of Jesus' messianic kingship, a dominion that is expressed through service (Mk 10:42-45; see discussion below). In the end, it is only the Gentile, unexpected centurion who sees that Jesus is revealed as the messianic son of God precisely by "how he died" (Mk 15:39).

Overall, then, Mark's Gospel functions as a parable--a subversive re-narration of Israel's messianic hope, revealing the riddle of how that hope eschatologically devolves upon Jesus. In Jesus' humble service and eventual death, the reign of God is manifest, delivering his people and bringing judgment upon their enemies (Mk 12-13). The parabolic nature of Jesus' ministry in Mark, then, is simultaneously apocalyptic and sapiential, underscoring again Jesus' role both as a prophesied shepherd-king like David and a wise author of enigmas, like Solomon. ⁶¹

Given these specific features of Mark's Gospel, John's baptism of Jesus is portrayed as his anointing to be the messianic "son of God" (cf. Acts 10:27-28).⁶² As David (a native of small-town Bethlehem) had appeared on the scene virtually out of nowhere to be anointed (1 Sa 16:11-12), so Jesus (a native of tiny Nazareth) appears unexpectedly at the Jordan to be baptized (Mk 1:9).⁶³ As the "Spirit of YHWH came mightily upon David" when he was anointed (1 Sa 16:13), so Jesus saw "the heavens torn open and the Spirit descending upon him" when he was baptized (Mk 1:10). As David soon fled to the wilderness (1 Sa 19-28, esp. 23:15) and struggled against his beast-like enemies, both then and later during his reign (cf. Ps 22:12-16; 57:4; 59:6, 14-15; 140:3; etc.), so Jesus was sent into the wilderness to confront Satan and "wild beasts," a confrontation than continued throughout his ministry (Mk 1:12-13; 8:11, 32-33; 10:2; 12:15).

As we have seen, however, Jesus' messianic kingship is manifest in service, leading to death. So Jesus' tells his disciples,

You know that those who are considered rulers over the Gentiles lord it over them, and their great ones are tyrants over them. But it is not so among you; rather, whoever wishes to become great among you must be your servant, and whoever wishes to be first among you must be slave to all. For even the son of man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many. (Mk 10:42-45).

This statement comes only after Jesus had explained his mission of service and death to his disciples three times (Mk 8:27-31; 9:30-31; 10:32-34), each time leading to their disbelief and their disputing about whom among them would be greatest in the kingdom (8:32; 9:32-34; 10:35-37). In response, Jesus twice explains the nature of his mission and what it means to follow him along that way:

If anyone desires to come after me, he must deny himself, take up his cross, and follow me. For whoever desires to save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for my sake and for the good news will save it.
If anyone desires to be first, he must be last of all and servant of all. (Mk 8:34-35; 9:35)

The third time, James and John had asked if they might sit at Jesus' right and left in his "glory" (Mk 10:37). Inasmuch as Jesus' messianic glory in Mark is revealed preeminently in the cross, he says, "...to sit at my right hand or at my left is not mine to grant, but is for those for whom it has been prepared" (Mk 10:40). As it turns out, those for whom it has been prepared are two zealots: "...they also crucified two insurrectionists, one his right and the other on his left" (Mk 15:27). Surely, James and John "did not know what they were asking" (Mk 10:38).

Uniquely to Mark's Gospel, however, Jesus goes on to ask James and John, "Are you able...to be baptized with the baptism that I am baptized with?" (Mk 10:38), seemingly indicating his imminent death upon the cross. But the image of baptism is not accidental. The "way" of Jesus as messianic king was one that Mark shows inexorably to lead to the cross. Thus Jesus' baptism by John was a baptism into this way and, thus, into service and death.⁶⁴ And this is what we would expect. As we have seen before, by submitting to John's baptism, Jesus was identifying with his people in exile and embodying the eschatological expectations of Israel for national resurrection. This is as true in Mark as in Matthew and Mark has Jesus taking up John's very message, "The time is fulfilled and the reign of God has drawn near. Repent and believe in the good news" (Mk 1:15). In Mark, however, Jesus' association with John takes on a particularly messianic and Davidic focus, paradoxically interpreting the reign of God as Jesus' death and presenting the resurrection of Israel as the vindication of Jesus' followers by their risen Lord (Mk 12:35-37; 13:26-27). This vindication occurs both through the sufferings of Jesus' followers along the way at the hands of their enemies (Mk 13:9-13),⁶⁵ and through the eventual judgment of those enemies, typologically revealed in the destruction of Jerusalem and her Temple (Mk 12:1-13:37), thereby opening the reign of God to all nations (Mk 13:27).

As his followers, the disciples are called by Jesus to trace his steps along this way. He says to James and John, "You will indeed...be baptized with the baptism I am baptized with" (Mk 10:39). In Mark's Gospel Jesus is speaking not only to James and John, but also to all Mark's hearers who would also follow Jesus. Where the disciples did not understand, those disciples who hear these words are challenged in their own understanding of who Jesus is and what it means to follow him. For Mark, to be baptized is to share Jesus' own baptism and thereby to be identified with Jesus as the messianic king and incorporated into the eschatological fulfillment of Israel. To follow Jesus in a life of service unto death, is not optional, then, but something that every baptized Christian "will indeed" experience. Even those disciples who, like Jesus, exercise authority in teaching, healing, and power over evil, must do so as those who take up the cross (cf. Mk 3:13-19). And if it was necessary for Jesus to confront the temptations of Satan and others through the power of the Spirit, why should his followers expect their way to be easy? Like Matthew, then, baptism for Mark is not merely a onetime event, but a sign under which a Christian's whole life is lived and, indeed, given up in order that it might be saved.⁶⁶

Conclusions

In this essay I have shown how the narrative typologies of Matthew and Mark can be employed to understand their individual theologies of Christian baptism. For these writers, the Christian rite is a baptism that is shared with Jesus whose baptism, in turn, must be interpreted in the context of the ministry of John the Baptizer. For Matthew, baptism functions as a new exodus in union with Jesus as a new Moses and Joshua and as a renewed Israel. On the other hand, for Mark, baptism functions as a paradoxical return from exile in union with Jesus as a messianic king who embodies the reign of God in service, suffering, and death.

These two theologies, however, are not in any fundamental opposition to one another. Rather, both interpret the ministry of Jesus and the Christian community in terms of the story of Israel, finding the climax of that story in the ministry of Jesus and fulfilled among his followers. For both, the story of Jesus is a story of judgment and vindication (return, resurrection, forgiveness), but with a reversal of expectations. While Jesus' apparent judgment upon the cross actually led to his vindication as the one in whom Israel is restored, Israel herself (in terms of the Old Covenant order, at least) falls under judgment. In regard to baptism, all who share Jesus' baptism also share in his vindication, if they continue to live in accordance with that baptismal sign. Moreover, Israel's judgment opens the way of Jesus to all nations through baptism, implying thereby that those who refuse to share in Jesus' baptism remain, like Israel, under judgment.

Thus, a theology of baptism emerges, appearing much the way it always had, but now rooted more deeply in the biblical narratives. Baptism into Messiah is renewed life in the Spirit, forgiveness of sins, adoption as God's children, and vindication (justification) before God. But it also calls one into a new way of life, embodying the service of Jesus, sanctifying suffering, and preparing one for death in the knowledge that the return from exile that Jesus himself experienced in resurrection, is also one that he graciously shares through baptism.

Endnotes

1. Oddly enough, the synoptic Gospels' accounts of baptism are often virtually ignored in explanations of Christian baptism, e.g., Martos 1991:144-146; Schmemman 1974; Schanz 1966: 84-115.

2. See Wright 1996. Regarding Jesus' "mighty works" he writes, "They were signs which were intended as, and would have been perceived as, the physical inauguration of the kingdom of Israel's god...The stories [Jesus] told, and acted out, made it clear that he envisaged his own work as bringing Israel's history to its fateful climax" (196-197). See also Sanders 1985, Theissen 1987, and Witherington 1995.

3. See Wright 1992bb, esp. 359-370 and 444-464.

4. Regarding the ongoing discussion of the Synoptic problem, see Fitzmyer 1998, Neirynck 1990, Stein 1987, Wenham 1992, etc. While I'm not completely convinced by arguments for Markan priority and tend to suspect that Luke is dependent upon Matthew and Mark, no particular resolution of the synoptic problem is not essential to any of the points I shall be making. On the beginning of Mark's Gospel, see, Guelich 1982 and Heil 1992: 27-38.

5. See Webb 1991 for a detailed account of John the Baptizer's ministry. See also Wright 1996:160-162.

6. Webb 1991:261-278 discusses some of these features in a helpful way. John's Gospel likewise explicitly attests to [1] and [4] - [6], though [2] and [3] are implied.

7. See Robinson 1962 on John's baptism and Thiering 1980 and 1981 more general considerations the Qumran washings and their relation to the baptisms of John and the early church. See also Beasley-Murray 1963:11-18.

8. See Sanders 1992 for a discussion of the nature of the Qumran sect.

9. As Dahl 1955:44 also suggests.

10. Josephus, Wars 2.137-142. See also Thiering 1991:616-623, though I'm not entirely convinced by Thiering's reconstruction of the Qumran "novitiate."

11. For a similar evaluation, see Rowley 1959.

12. On the Pharisees, again see Sanders 1992.

13. See Jeremias 1960 and 1963 and Torrance 1957 for a defense of an early date for proselyte baptism and its influence on John's and Christian rites. Beasley-Murray 1963:18-31, Webb 1991:131-162 and Smith 1982 all argue against such a view.

14. Here and in the following remarks, the notion of "vindication" is to be taken in the fully Jewish sense--as a judicial verdict of right-standing before the face of YHWH (Kenny 1971:175). It is equivalent to what is usually translated "justification" (Gk: dikaiosune) in the Pauline corpus. While the specific term is largely absent from the Gospel's, Israel's vindication was a staple belief of Second Temple Judaism and is expressed in a variety of different ways. See Wright 1996 and 1997:95-133.

15. Webb 1991:360-366 details the symbolic possibilities of the wilderness in the first century context.

16. Webb 1991:203-205, Brooks 1987:14 and Wright 1996:160.

17. Wright 1996:268-274, in part critiquing Sanders 1992.

18. See John's message in Mt 3:7-12. Jesus carries this theme of judgment forward in his own ministry, particularly in his parables. See Wright 1996:320-368.

19. On the theme of repentance as connected with a return from exile, see, e.g., Dt 30:1-10; Isa 44:22; Dan 9; Zech 1:3-6; etc. In Second Temple literature, see, e.g., Bar 2:32-34; Jub 1:15-23; 1QS 10:20; etc. See also Wright 1996:246-258 for an extended discussion.

20. See Wenham 1981:145-147 and Milgrom 1981.

21. See Wenham 1979:203-214 and Milgrom 1991: 830-901.

22. See Wenham 1979:135-145, Milgrom 1991:493-569, and Leithart 1998:36-63.

23. The third rite, priestly ordination, is, of course, also a transition, though one from cleanness to holiness. Among the Gospels it is arguably Luke that presents baptism in terms of priestly ordination. See Leithart 1996:82-88.

24. On the meaning of "cutting off" as implying death see Wenham 1979:241-242.

25. It is in this context that Paul's cryptic remark regarding "baptism for the dead" is to be understood (1 Cor 15:29). "For" (Gk: huper) need not to be taken as "baptism for the benefit of the dead," but could as easily mean "baptism because of" or "on account of the dead." "Those" who baptize on account of the dead makes reference, then, to "those" who practice the Jewish rite of purification from defilement by a corpse. My comments below should suffice to show why Paul could take such a rite to provide support for the Christian (and Jewish) doctrine of resurrection. That a first century writer could refer to this rite as a "baptism" is evident from Heb 9:10.

26. And so Beasley-Murray 1963:9.

27. Wright 1992b:320-338.

28. In this connection, we can also note the close parallels between Jesus' cleansing of the Temple and the Torah's regulations regarding a house infected by leprosy. Compare Lev 14:33-53, esp. 43-45 and Eze 8:5-13 with Mt 21:12-17; 24:1-2; Mk 11:11, 15-19.

29. Brooks 1987:21-33 is suggestive of many of the above points, but with a slightly different analysis.

30. Calvin 1960:1307-8 (Institutes IV.xv.6). See also Wallace 1953:175-176 and MacGregor 1958:132-133.

31. A similar connection between Christian baptism and the baptism of Jesus is made by Cullman 1950:9-22; Dunn 1970:23-37; and Beasley-Murray 1973:45-67.

32. For examples of authors who suggest that Jesus' baptism by John would be a problem for the early church, see Williams 1944; Wink 1968; Webb 1991:57-58; Viviano 1990:637. It is suggested, among other things, that Mark's account highlig hts the forgiveness of sins, while the later Gospel writers suppress it. Given Mt 3:6 and Lk 3:3, this seems unlikely; see comments by Brooks 1987:35-45; Webb 1991:64-65. Much this perspective is based not only upon the assumed priority of Mark, but also that his account of things is generally "straightforward" and "theologically naïve." This approach to Mark's Gospel has come under increased assault in recent years; see, e.g., Heil 1992, Fowler 1991, and Camery-Hoggatt 1992. While it is true that the (much later) Gospel of the Nazareans specifically denies that Jesus was baptized by John, this is more likely due to a gnostic disparagement of material sacraments than anything else.

33. For an elaboration of this perspective, see Gaffin 1987; 1992. See also Wright 1996:477-539. And so we read in 1 Ti 3:16 that, in his resurrection, Jesus was "vindicated [or justified] by the Spirit."

34. See Allison 1993 for an extensive elaboration of this Mosaic typology.

35. Powell 1992 notes how this statement in Mt 1:21 is programmatic for the entire Gospel. See also Kingsbury 1988.

36. As Wright 1992b:385 suggests. In biblical numerology, the number seven or the seventh item in a series often indicates some kind of completion or fullness.

37. In fact, the overall structure of Matthew, alternating between narratives and sermons, forms one large chiasm in which the blessing and woes are in parallel. See Lohr 1961:427. More particularly, the parable of the houses on rock and sand in Mt 7:24-27 are echoed by the parables of judgment against the Temple in Mt 24:1-25:30. Also compare Mt 7:21-3 and Mt 25:11-12, 44-46. See Wright 1992b:387.

38. See Wright 1992b:387-389.

39. In this context, Jesus' promise to his disciples, "I am with you always" (Mt 28:19), echoes God's word to Israel before crossing the Jordan, "YHWH your God himself will cross before you. He will destroy these nations before you and you shall dispossess them. Joshua will also cross over before you, as YHWH promised...Be strong and bold; have no fear or dread of them because it is YHWH your God who goes with you" (Dt 31:3, 6). As Joshua (Mt 1:21) and Immanuel ("God with us," Mt 1:22), Matthew's Jesus fulfills both aspects of the typology.

40. Not only is this interpretation attested to by Paul (see below), it is prominent in the post-apostolic writings as well. See Danielou 1956:86-98.

41. Note also how Jesus' overcoming of temptation for forty days in the wilderness (by continually quoting Deuteronomy, I might add; Mt 4:1-11), provides the answer to Israel's disobedience and judgment for forty years in the wilderness. And so, his baptism marks the beginning of his resistance to the powers of evil.

42. See Kline 1980:13-20 and Hough 1955:25-32

43. See McDonnell 1990:15-22

44. In regard to the globalization of Israel's story in Matthew, see also 2:1-12; 5:5; 8:5-13; 15:21-28.

45. Thus we can see the significance for Matthew of the Trinitarian baptismal formula in Mt 28:19.

46. Much of the following material on Romans is drawn from Wright 1998.

47. In light of what I say below, I think we should detect here an echo of "This is my beloved son" and the descent of the Spirit at Jesus' baptism (Mt 3:16-17), but now applied to those who share that baptism.

48. Wright 1998:16.

49. Paul seems to use "Messiah" in this corporate sense in a few places (e.g., Phm 6; Gal 3:15-20), and it is implied by his frequent use of "en Christo (in Messiah)." See Wright 1992a:41-55.

50. Much of following material is drawn from Heil 1992 and Meyers 1997.

51. The fact is, unlike his father (Herod the Great) or half-brother (Herod Agrippa I), Herod (Antipas) was never the "king," but a merely tetrarch, later to be removed and exiled by emperor Caligula in AD 39. Mark's ironic terminology, however, carries theological force.

52. A more distant background here is likely Ahab's murder of Nabaoth and the theft of his vineyard, both through the scheming of his wife, Jezebel (1 Ki 21:1-16).

53. In this regard, we must remember that prior to his anointing by Samuel, David himself was a shepherd (1 Sa 16:11, 19) .

54. At the beginning of this century, Wrede argued that Mark made use of a notion of a "messianic secret" which arose in the early church to explain how Jesus had come to be seen as a divine Messiah when Jesus himself thought no such thing. See Wrede 1971. Such a theory of Mark's gospel has been largely discredited. See Tuckett 1983 and Wright 1992b:390-396.

55. Given the Gospel as a whole, Jesus' parable of the soils (Mk 4:13-20) is not merely an observation in the abstract that "when trouble or persecution arises on account of the word, immediately [some] fall away" (4:17). It is also a prediction of the disciples' own falling away (cf. 14:27).

56. The inclusion of the Gentiles into the story of Israel and her Messiah is a theme throughout Mark, see Mk 6:4; 7:24-8:10, 19-21; 12:9; 13:27; etc.

57. In addition, it would not have escaped the notice of the first hearers that the name "David" means "the beloved." On the meaning of "son of God," see Moule 1977:22-31.

58. This assumes, of course, that Mk 1:1 is original to the Gospel. Some have argued that Mark's beginning, as well as his ending, are lost and thus Mk 1:1 is redactional. See Koester 1990:13 and Wright 1992b:390 n.67.

59. Jesus' announcement of judgment against Israel, interestingly enough, climaxes in his prophecy of the Temple's destruction (Mk 13).

60. Strikingly, as we know from Luke, "the Way" was an early name for the followers of Jesus (Acts 9:2; 19:9, 23; 22:4; 24:14, 22; cf. 16:17; 18:26).

61. The apocalyptic nature of Mark is evident not only from the "little apocalypse" of Mk 13, but also from other aspects of the text, e.g., the heavens being torn open (Mk 1:10) and the whole "messianic secret." See Wright 1992b:390-396. The use of irony in Mark and the paradoxical nature of Jesus' ministry and teachings indicate that it also functions as "wisdom literature" in the sense associated with Proverbs and Ecclesiastes, both of which are associated with Solomon. See Camery-Hoggatt 1992 and, though deeply flawed, Mack 1988. These observations should also indicate that Bultmann, Schweitzer, and their progeny are mistaken to suppose that the categories of "apocalyptic" and "sapiential" are fundamentally at odds.

62. Recall that the term "Messiah" literally means "anointed one."

63. This may also provide a theological and thematic reason why Mark's Gospel lacks an infancy narrative. His lack of such a narrative has often played a role in discussions of Markan priority, e.g., Fitzmyer 1998.

64. See McDonnell 1990:10-11.

65. In this way, Mark is suggestive of the Pauline theme of sharing in Jesus' resurrection and vindication through present suffering (Php 3:7-11; Col 1:24-26; etc.).

66. This emphasis on baptism as a sign over the entire life of a Christian and, especially, as a sign of suffering with Christ, has received greatest attention in Anabaptist theology. See Armour 1966, esp. 140-142.

Works Cited

Allison, Dale C. 1993. The New Moses: a Matthean typology. Edinburgh: T&T Clark.

Armour, Rollin S. 1966. Anabaptist Baptism: A Representative Study. Scottsdale: Herald.

Beasley-Murray, G.R. 1962. Baptism in the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans.

Brooks, Oscar S. 1987. The Drama of Decision: Baptism in the New Testament. Peabody: Hendrickson.

Calvin, John. 1960. Institutes of the Christian Religion. Ed. by John T. McNeill and trans. by Ford Lewis Battles. Philadelphia: Westminster.

Camery-Hoggatt, Jerry. 1992. Irony in Mark's Gospel: Text and Subtext. Cambridge: Cambridge.

Cullmann, Oscar. 1950. Baptism in the New Testament. London: SCM.

Dahl, Nils A. 1955. "The Origin of Baptism" in Interpretationes ad Vetus Testamentum. Oslo: Forlaget land og kirke.

Danielou, Jean. 1956. The Bible and the Liturgy. Notre Dame: Notre Dame.

Dunn, James D.G. 1970. Baptism in the Holy Spirit. London: SCM.

Fitzmyer, Joseph A. 1998 "The Priority of Mark and the 'Q' Source in Luke" in To Advance the Gospel: New Testament Studies. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans.

Fowler, Robert M. 1991. Let the Reader Understand: Reader-Response Criticism and the Gospel of Mark. Minneapolis: Fortress.

Gaffin, Richard B. 1992 "Justification in Luke-Acts" in Right with God: Justification in the Bible and World. Carlisle and Grand Rapids: Paternoster and Baker. 106-125.

-----. 1987. Resurrection and Redemption: A Study in Paul's Soteriology. Phillipsburg: Presbyterian and Reformed.

Guelich, Robert A. 1982. " 'The Beginning of the Gospel'--Mark 1:1-15." Biblical Research 27:5-15.

Heil, John Paul. 1992. The Gospel of Mark as a Model for Action. New York: Paulist.

Hough, Robert E. 1955. The Ministry of the Glory Cloud. New York: Philosophical Library.

Jeremias, Joachim. 1960. Infant Baptism in the First Four Centuries. London: SCM.

-----. 1963. The Origins of Infant Baptism. London: SCM.

Kenny, J.P. 1971. "Justification" in Catholic Dictionary of Theology. London: Nelson.

Kingsbury, Jack D. 1988. Matthew as Story. 2nd ed. Philadelphia, Fortress.

Kline, Meredith G. 1980. Images of the Spirit. Grand Rapids: Baker.

Koester, Helmut. 1990. Ancient Christian Gospels: Their History Development. Philadelphia: Trinity Press International.

Leithart, Peter J. 1998. The Priesthood of the Plebs: The Baptismal Transformation of Antique Order. Ph.D. dissertation. Cambridge U.

Lohr, C.H. 1961. "Oral techniques in the Gospel of Matthew." Catholic Biblical Quarterly 23:403-435.

MacGregor, Geddes. 1958. Corpus Christi: The Nature of the Church According to the Reformed Tradition. Philadelphia, Westminster.

Mack, Burton L. 1988. The Myth of Innocence: Mark and Christian Origins. Philadelphia: Fortress.

Martos, Joseph. 1991. Doors to the Sacred: A Historical Introduction to the Sacraments of the Catholic Church. Ligouri: Ligouri.

McDonnell, Kilian and George T. Montague. 1990. Christian Initiation and Baptism in the Holy Spirit. Collegeville: Liturgical Press.

Meyers, Jeffrey J. 1997. "Theology of Mark." Lecture presented at the 7th Annual Biblical Horizons Conference. Niceville, FL: Biblical Horizons.

Milgrom, Jacob. 1981. "The Paradox of the Red Cow." Vetus Testamentum 31:62-72.

-----. 1991. Leviticus 1-16: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary. The Anchor Bible. New York: Doubleday.

Moule, Charles F.D. 1977. The Origin of Christology. Cambridge: Cambridge UP.

Neirynck., Frans. 1990. "Synoptic Problem" in The New Jerome Biblical Commentary. Ed. by R. Brown, J. Fitzmyer, and R. Murphy. 40.587-595.

Powell, Mark A. 1992. "The Plot and Subplots of Matthew's Gospel." New Testament Studies 38:187-204.

Robinson, John A.T. 1962. "The Baptism of John and the Qumran Community" in Twelve New Testament Studies. Naperville: Allenson.

Rowley, H.H. 1959. "The Baptism of John and the Qumran Sect" in New Testament Essays. Ed. by A.J.B. Higgins. Manchester.

Sanders, E.P. 1985. Jesus and Judaism. Philadelphia: Fortress.

-----. 1992. Judaism: Practice and Belief, 63 BCE - 66 CE. Philadelphia: Trinity.

Schanz, Joh n P. 1966. The Sacraments of Life and Worship. Milwaukee: Bruce.

Schemman, Alexander. 1974. Of Water and the Spirit: A Liturgical Study of Baptism. Crestwood: St. Vladimir's Seminary.

Smith, Derwood. 1982. "Jewish Proselyte Baptism and the Baptism of John." Restoration Quarterly 25:13-32.

Stein, R.H. 1987. The Synoptic Problem. Grand Rapids: Baker.

Theissen, Gerd. 1987. The Shadow of the Galillean: The Quest of the Historical Jesus in Narrative Form. London: SCM.

Thiering, B.E. 1980. "Inner and Outer Cleansing at Qumran as a Background to New Testament Baptism." New Testament Studies 26:266-277.

-----. 1981. "Qumran Initiation and New Testament Baptism." New Testament Studies 27:615-631.

Torrance, T.F. 1957. "Proselyte Baptism." New Testament Studies 1:150-154.

Tuckett, Christopher M. 1983. The Messianic Secret. Philadelphia: Fortress.

Viviano, Benedict T. 1990. "The Gospel According to Matthew" in The New Jerome Biblical Commentary. Ed. by R. Brown, J. Fitzmyer, and R. Murphy. 42.630-674.

Wallace, Ronald S. 1953. Calvin's Doctrine of the Word and Sacrament. Edinburgh: T&T Clark.

Webb, Robert L. 1991. John the Baptizer and Prophet: A Socio-Historical Study. Journal for the Study of the New Testament, Supplement Series 62. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic.

Wenham, John. 1992. Re-dating Matthew, Mark, and Luke: A Fresh Assault on the Synoptic Problem. Downers Grove: InterVarsity.

Wenham, Gordon J. 1979. The Book of Leviticus. The New International Commentary on the Old Testament. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans.

-----. 1981. Numbers: an Introduction and Commentary. Tyndale Old Testament Commentaries. Downers Grove: InterVarsity.

Williams, G.O. 1944. "The Baptism in Luke's Gospel." Journal of Biblical Studies 40:31-38.

Wink, W. 1968. John the Baptist in the Gospel Tradition. Cambridge: Cambridge UP.

Witherington, Ben. 1995. The Jesus Quest: The Third Search for the Jew of Nazareth. Downers Grove: InterVarsity.

Wrede, William. 1971 [1901]. The Messianic Secret. Greenwood: Attic.

Wright, N.T. 1998. "The New Inheritance According to Paul." Bible Review June:16, 47.

-----. 1997. What Saint Paul Really Said. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans.

-----. 1996. Jesus and the Victory of God. Minneapolis: Fortress.

-----. 1992a. The Climax of the Covenant: Christ and the Law in Paul's Theology. Minneapolis: Fortress.

-----. 1992b. The New Testament and the People of God. Minneapolis: Fortress.