52. Relation of the Supernatural at the Baptism of Jesus to the Supernatura... (Chapter 2. Baptism and Temptation of Jesus.) (The Life of Jesus Critically Examined) (Strauss, David Friedrich)

AT the beginning of this chapter, we inquired into the subjective views of Jesus in his reception of John's baptism, or the idea which he entertained of its relation to his own diameter. We close this discussion with an inquiry into the objective purpose of the miracles at the baptism of Jesus, or the mode in which they were to subserve the manifestation of his Messiahship.

The common answer to such an inquiry is, that Jesus was thereby inducted to his public office, and declared to be the Messiah, i.e. that nothing was conferred on him, and that simply the character which he already possessed was manifested to others. But, it may be asked, is such an abstraction intended by our narrators? A consecration to an office, effected by divine, co-operation, was ever considered by antiquity as a delegation of divine powers for its fulfilment; hence, in the Old Testament, the kings, as soon as they are anointed, are filled with the spirit of God (1 Sam. x. 6, 10, xvi. 13); and in the New Testament also, the apostles, before entering on their vocation, are furnished with supernatural gifts (Acts ii.). It may, therefore, be beforehand conjectured, that according to the original sense of the Gospels, the consecration of Jesus at his baptism was attended with a supply of higher powers; and this is confirmed by an examination of our narratives. For the synoptic writers all state, that after the baptism, the Spirit led Jesus into the wilderness, obviously marking this journey as the first effect of the higher principle infused at his baptism: and in John, the words pneuma ep' auton applied to the descending Spirit, seem to intimate, that from the time of the baptism there was a relation not previously subsisting, between the pneuma a(gion and Jesus.

This interpretation of the marvels at the baptism of Jesus, seems in contradiction with the narratives of his conception. If Jesus, as Matthew and Luke state, was conceived by the Holy Ghost; or it, as John propounds, the divine Logoj, the Word, was made flesh in him, from the beginning of his earthly existence; why did he yet need, at his baptism, a special intromission of the pneuma a(gion?

Several modern expositors have seen, and sought to solve, this difficulty. Olshausen's explanation consists in the distinction between the potential and the actual; but it is self-contradictory, for if the character of the Xristoj which was manifested actu, with the ripened manhood of Jesus, at his baptism, was already present potentially in the child and youth; there must have also been an inward principle of development, by means of which his powers would gradually unfold themselves from within, instead of being first awakened by a sudden descent of the Spirit from without. this, however, does not preclude the possibility that the divine principle, existing in Jesus, as supernaturally conceived, from the moment of his birth, ^{P.255} might need, owing to the human form of its development, some impulse from without; and Luke has more justly proceeded on this contrast between external impulse and inward development. The logoj present in Jesus from his birth, needed, he thinks, however strong might be the inward bent, some external stimulus and vivification, in order to arrive at full activity and manifestation in the world; and that which awakens and guides the divine life-germ in the world is, on apostolic showing, the Holy Spirit. Allowing this, yet the inward disposition and the requisite force of the outward stimulus stand in an inverse relation to each other; so that the stronger the outward stimulus required, the weaker is the inward disposition; but in a case where the inward disposition is consummate, as it must be supposed in Jesus, engendered by the Spirit, or animated by the logoj, the exterior impulse ought to be a minimum, that is, every circumstance, even the most common, might serve as a determination of the inward tendency. But at the baptism of Jesus we see the maximum of exterior impulse, in the visible descent of the divine Spirit; and although we allow for the special nature of the Messianic task, for the fulfilment of which he must be qualified, yet the maximum of inward disposition, which fitted him to be the ui(oj qeou, cannot at the same time be supposed as existing in him from his birth: a consequence which L cke only escapes, by reducing the baptismal scene to a mere inauguration, thus, as has been already shown, contradicting the Gospel records.

We must here give a similar decision to that at which we arrived concerning the genealogies; viz, that, in that circle of the early Christian Church, in which the narrative of the descent of the pneuma on Jesus at his baptism was formed, the idea that Jesus was generated by the same pneuma cannot have prevailed; and while, at the present day, the communication of the divine nature to Jesus is thought of as contemporary with his conception, those Christians must have regarded his baptism as the epoch of such communication.

In fact, those primitive Christians whom, in a former discussion, we found to have known nothing, or to have believed nothing, of the supernatural conception of Jesus, were also those who connected the first communication of divine powers to Jesus with his baptism in the Jordan. For no other doctrine did the orthodox Fathers of the Church more fiercely persecute the ancient Ebionites, with their gnostic fellow-believer Cerinthus, than for this: that the Holy Spirit first united himself with Jesus at his baptism. In the gospel ^{P.256} of the Ebionites it was written that the Pneuma not only descended on Jesus in the form of a dove, but entered into him; and according to Justin, it was the general expectation of the Jews, that higher powers would first be granted to the Messiah, when he should be anointed by his forerunner Elijah.

The development of these ideas seems to have been the following. When the Messianic dignity of Jesus began to be acknowledged among the Jews, it was thought appropriate to connect his coming into possession of the requisite gifts, with the epoch from which he was in some degree known, and which, from the ceremony that marked it, was also best adapted to represent that anointing with the Holy Spirit, expected by the Jews for their Messiah: and from this point of view was formed the legend of the occurrences at the baptism. But as reverence for Jesus was heightened, and men appeared in the Christian Church who were acquainted with more exalted Messianic ideas, this tardy manifestation of Messiahship was no longer sufficient; his relation with the Holy Spirit was referred to his conception: and from this point of view was formed the tradition of the supernatural conception of Jesus. Here too, perhaps, the words of the heavenly voice, which might originally be those of Ps. ii. 7, were altered after Isaiah 43.1. For the words, "This day have I begotten you," were consistent with the notion that Jesus was constituted the Son of God at his baptism; but they were no longer suitable to that occasion, when the opinion had arisen that the origin of his life was an immediate, divine act. By this later representation, however, the earlier one was by no means supplanted, but on the contrary, tradition and her recorders being large-hearted, both narratives that of the miracles at the baptism, and that of the supernatural conception, or the indwelling of the logoj in Jesus from the beginning of his life, although, strictly, they exclude each other, went forth peaceably side by side, and so were depicted by our evangelists, not excepting even the fourth. Just as in the case of the genealogies: the narrative of the imparting of the Spirit at the baptism could not arise after the formation of the idea that Jesus was engendered by the Spirit; but it might be retained as a supplement, because tradition is ever unwilling to renounce any of its acquired treasures.