Jesus' Obedience in Mark 1:9-13

Jesus’ Obedience and Mark 1:9-13

I offer a hypothesis that the progression from baptism (1:9) to theophany or epiphany (1:10-11) to testing/temptation (1:12-13) is related to the obedience of Jesus. This hypothesis has the advantage of offering an explanation as to why the theophany follows the baptism and why the testing follows the theophany. I chose Mark because I believe my hypothesis is easier to make with Matthew for example because of Matthew 3:15 and a more full account of the temptation.

Why Theophany after Baptism?

A question seldom asked is why does the theophany follow the baptism? Is the baptism just the occasion for the theophany which could have occurred at any time? Mark 1:10-11 is as follows:

And immediately coming up out of the water he saw being open up the heavens and the Spirit as a dove descending towards [or “into”] him. And there was a voice out of the heavens, “You are the son of me, the beloved, with you I am well pleased.”

Of importance is that the descending Spirit occurs after the baptism; we are not led to think that the baptism in itself confers the Spirit. So, if the baptism in itself does not explain the theophany, then what does? The answer to that question depends on what the baptism meant.

The Importance of the Baptism

The importance of Jesus’ baptism can be seen by a few factors. First, Jesus’ public ministry only begins after the account of the baptism in all Gospels. In Mark, the gospel itself begins with John the Baptist and Mark 1:1 (“the beginning of the good news”) could be interpreted to refer to John the Baptist and Jesus’ baptism. This is further bolstered by what Peter says in Acts 10:37 (“You know the things having happened throughout all Judea, having begun from Galilee after the baptism which John preached”), especially if Mark was connected to Peter in a special way. Furthermore, we have a significant clue from Jesus himself in the controversy over his authority (Mark 11:27-33). There, we may infer that Jesus thought that John’s baptism was from God.

The last point segues to the actual meaning of John’s baptism. Josephus gives us an independent account of John’s baptism in Antiquities 18 §117:

For Herod killed him, although he was a good man and [simply] bade the Jews to join in baptism, provided that they were cultivating virtue and practicing justice toward one another and piety toward God. For [only] thus, in John’s opinion, would the baptism [he administered] indeed be acceptable [to God], namely, if they used it to obtain not pardon for some sins but rather the cleansing of their bodies, inasmuch as [it was taken for granted that] their souls had already been purified by justice.

This account jibes well with one of the horns of the dilemma Jesus forced on his opponents in Mark 11:31. Jesus seems to accuse his opponents for not believing John. The point is that John’s baptism signifies repentance and the willingness to be obediently subject to God. Jesus surely accuses his opponents elsewhere of exactly this fault, which is brought out even in the parable of the vineyard which immediately follows (Mark 12:1-12). It also jibes well with Mark 1:4 where John’s baptism is described as a “baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins.” The addition of “repentance” gives the impression that forgiveness is not the magical outcome of the baptism.

My thesis is that the theophany is in response to Jesus’ willingness to be obediently subject to God. Jesus had to come out to be baptized, not a trifling event and already shows the commitment of Jesus. The bugaboo is of course that Jesus did not sin, but that is of no real objection to the thesis. A comparison of Mark 1:5 (those from the Judean countryside and Jerusalem who confess their sins) with 1:9 (only Jesus with no mention of confession of sin) shows that Mark did not think Jesus’ sinlessness was an embarrassment to Jesus’ baptism. The reason is that the baptism was only the symbol of the obedient dedication Jesus demonstrated. Sure, Jesus was always obedient and always God’s Son, but it was only at the baptism that Jesus seems to have made the decision to follow God’s plans in a special, public way. I take it that this was the occasion for God’s pleasure expressed in Mark 1:11. Regardless of what “Son of God” also means, it at least means the obedient relationship a son has with his father, a relationship that is getting harder and harder for us in the individualistic West to understand.

Why Temptation after the Theophany?

This question is less controversial. Mark does not say why Jesus was tested/tempted nor does he relate any dialogue between Jesus and Satan. I take the connection to be related to Satan’s attempt to undermine Jesus’ obedient dedication. A similar dynamic is involved in Job. After (because!) Job is described as a righteous man (Job 1:1,8), Satan tests him because he doubts Jobs true character.

Theological Upshot

I think it is hard for most evangelicals to view Jesus as commending God’s favor because of something he does, however that is precisely what is happening according to my hypothesis. Commentators are fond to point out that Mark does not seem to offer Jesus as an example to follow in Mark 1:9-13. However, I do not think Mark related these incidents with no eye to discipleship. Jesus was obedient and expected others to be obedient. This is why his message is summarized in Mark 1:15 as “Repent, and believe in the Good News.”