Sermon Tone Analysis

1/15/2023 – Baptism of the LORD and the beginning of a revolution

Good morning One River,

Today marks a beginning of sorts on the Christian calendar.

We’ve effectively made it through the Sundays of Christmas and we celebrated the Epiphany of the LORD last week.

This week we turn to the beginning of Jesus ministry on Earth.

We turn to his starting point.

His Baptism.

We’ve been using the terminology of the three P’s; prayer, posture, and presence.

This week I want to look at what that would have looked like in Jesus’ own life.

Let’s start by reading a couple of texts today.

John 1:26-34- John Testifies About Jesus

29 The next day John saw Jesus coming toward him and said, “Look, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world!

30 This is the one I meant when I said, ‘A man who comes after me has surpassed me because he was before me.’ 31 I myself did not know him, but the reason I came baptizing with water was that he might be revealed to Israel.”

32 Then John gave this testimony: “I saw the Spirit come down from heaven as a dove and remain on him.

33 And I myself did not know him, but the one who sent me to baptize with water told me, ‘The man on whom you see the Spirit come down and remain is the one who will baptize with the Holy Spirit.’

34 I have seen and I testify that this is God’s Chosen One.”

Matthew 3:15–4:1 (NIV)

15 Jesus replied, “Let it be so now; it is proper for us to do this to fulfill all righteousness.”

Then John consented.

16 As soon as Jesus was baptized, he went up out of the water.

At that moment heaven was opened, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove and alighting on him.

17 And a voice from heaven said, “This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased.”

I think we’ve probably heard many messages about the Baptism of the LORD and how it marked the beginning of his ministry.

How the Spirit descended on him and how God claimed him as his Son in that moment to proclaim his righteousness to the world.

All that is true, I wouldn’t argue any of it, but I want to look at a different perspective and see what it might have looked like to the Romans at the time, and the Jewish leadership, that had fallen in line with Roman Rule.

What did Jesus Baptism mean to the people of his day?

The Birth of an Empire

After the assassination of Julius Caesar, and with the Republic in turmoil, a struggle for power ensued between Marc Antony(Caesar’s trusted young lieutenant) and Gaius Octavian (Caesar’s grandnephew and adopted son).

In a stroke of genius, Octavian sought support from a neglected and weakened Senate.

Emboldened by his deference to them, the Senate gave Octavian their backing and named Antony an “Enemy of the State.”Antony

fled for his life.

Octavian pursued and finally defeated him in the Battle of Actium in 31 BCE.

The good news (euangelion) of his victory moved the masses to proclaim Octavian their savior (soter) who singlehandedly brought “peace and security” to Rome.

In 27 BCE Octavian symbolically returned power to the Senate and took the title princeps, meaning “first among equals.”

The Senate, in appreciation of his magnanimity, named him “Augustus” or magnificent one.

Despite his apparent self-effacement, he gladly accepted the moniker.

Claiming Rome had a manifest destiny to rule the earth on behalf of the gods, Octavian “Augustus” Caesar assumed complete power over all Roman territories.

Rome became an imperial juggernaut.

Historians generally agree that Augustus transformed Rome into an “empire” (Latin, imperium) and reigned as its first “emperor” (Latin, imperator).

As “king of kings” he ruled over all client kings of conquered countries who, in turn, pledged their total allegiance to Octavian.

Any challenge to his rule was considered an act of sedition and punishable by death.

He was Lord and master of all.

When the Senate bestowed divine status on Julius Caesar posthumously (Divus Iulius), Augustus assumed the title “Son of God.”

Rome as a Domination System

In the Empire only two classes of people existed: ruling elites and the ruled, dominators and the dominated.

The latter had no say in governmental decisions.

A pyramid-like social structure with the emperor and his cronies at the top and the lowliest and marginalized at the bottom guaranteed that all wealth worked its way upward—the rest lived at a subsistence level.

Everyone knew their place in the societal pecking order.

The majority kept their heads down in public, submitted to authority, worked from dawn to dusk, paid taxes, kept a low profile, and went about their business.

They rarely challenged the official Roman narrative.

They formed patron-client relationships and paid homage to Caesar.

Rome utilized forced labor, excessive taxes, land confiscation, social stratification, patronage, political collaborators, civic religion (emperor worship), and military might to exploit and keep people in line.

On behalf of their emperor Roman generals and their troops marched to the edges of the Empire and offered “peace and security” (pax Romana) to any nation that submitted and pledged loyalty to Caesar.

Rome invaded, conquered, and enslaved those nations that refused.

An Oath of Allegiance

Caesar required certain individuals as well as nations to make a public vow of faithfulness.

This oath of allegiance was called a sacramentum.According to Van Slyke, there are 150 extant references to sacramentum in ancient Roman literature.

Roman dictator Julius Caesar was the first to use sacramentum in a military sense.

He described it as a voluntary oath taken by soldiers upon entering the Roman army.

Livy (ca 59 BCE‒17 CE) likewise noted that sacramentum was used during the Republic era as a soldier’s oath of obedience, administered by a consul, which obligated a soldier to obey his superiors and not to abandon his comrades-in-arms.

The verbalized ritual thus served as a covenant or agreement between officers and soldiers and was required to serve in the military.

Marcus Tullius Cicero (106 BCE‒43 BCE) wrote that when General Popilius chose to disband one of his Legions, young Cato wanted to continue serving in the army.

His father said the general “should swear him into service with a new oath of allegiance,” since his original sacramentum was no longer legally binding.

According to Roman senator and historian Tacitus (56 CE‒117 CE) sacramentum was defined during the Empire era as the verbal pledge of allegiance a soldier gave to his emperor.

Tacitus also spoke of “receiving the sacrament” (sacramentum acciperent) because the oath was being administered to the soldier on behalf of the emperor.

Soldiers were generally required to take the sacrament only once during their career, although the object of their oath changed from one Caesar to the next.

Because a sacramentum was considered sacred and taken in front of witnesses—both humans and deities—it was irrevocable.

Those breaking faith faced penalties ranging from shame to death.

A Counter-Imperial Sacramentum

Christ-followers borrowed the term sacramentum and used it to express their fealty to Christ and his kingdom.

Tertullian (160 CE‒225 CE) identified baptism specifically as the Christian sacramentum and contrasted it to a Roman soldier’s pledge of loyalty to the Emperor and Empire (Tertullian, Bapt.

4.4–5; Idol.

19.2).

Just as a soldier upon his oath of allegiance was inducted into Caesar’s army, so a believer was initiated by the sacrament of baptism into God’s kingdom.

Each vowed faithful service to his god and kingdom.

Baptism cannot be properly understood apart from locating it within the context of the Roman Empire and in relationship to Roman power.

As the locus and earthly manifestation of God’s restored kingdom, the church in the first century was the very antithesis of the Roman Empire.

When Christ-followers submitted to baptism and pledged their allegiance to a kingdom other than Rome and a king other than Caesar, they participated in a politically subversive act.

Through the sacramentum of baptism they joined a movement that rejected Rome’s public narrative, ideology, hierarchical social order, and Caesar’s claim to be Lord over all.

From its inception, the Jesus Movement was a threat to the social order of the Empire..

As a sacramentum, baptism was a “boundary crossing ritual,” a proverbial line drawn in the sand.

When crossed, it meant breaking formal ties with the past, declaring fealty to another Lord, and accepting a new and alternative identity—that of a Christ-follower.

Hence, baptism was a political act of subversion, a rite of resistance against the prevailing power structures that often led to persecution and even death.

Baptism as a Rite of Resistance

The Gospel writers trace the beginning of the Jesus Movement to the ministry of John the Baptizer, whose priestly father was part of the Temple establishment.

Breaking with family tradition John donned the garb of a prophet and publicly announced the imminent arrival of God’s reign.

The kingdom of God would be restored to Israel and extend outward until it encompassed the world.

To prepare for the kingdom, John called on God’s people to: 1) “Repent,” i.e. abandon former allegiances and turn to covenant faithfulness, and 2) “be baptized,” i.e. submit to a sin-cleansing water ritual.

Many heeded the call, but Jewish leaders—those forsaking the covenant and walking hand-in-hand with Rome—refused.

When Jesus aligned himself with the coming kingdom by submitting to John’s sacrament of baptism, it triggered a heavenly response.

A voice identified Jesus as the “Son of God” and the Spirit descended, empowering Jesus to heal, cast out demons, and speak for God.

As John and Jesus preached a counter-narrative to the State’s official public transcript, they found themselves in direct conflict with State authorities and paid for that stance with their lives.

According to the sanctioned Roman account, Jesus’ death ended his mission.

But the Gospel writers present an alternative ending to the story—that Jesus emerged from the grave as he had from the baptismal waters.

They claimed that God vindicated Jesus and gave him all authority in heaven and on earth (Matt 28:18), i.e. over Caesar, his client kings, and the demonic powers behind the throne.

The Gospel of Matthew chronicles that the resurrected Jesus commanded his loyal apostles to “go and make disciples of all nations” (v19).

These were the same nations conquered and controlled by Rome.

Their assignment was clear, but it was also controversial.

It included calling the converts to adhere to the Mosaic Covenant as explained by Jesus (Matt 5‒7) and summonsing them to make a sacramentum to God and his authorized king: “baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit” (Matt 28:20).

In the Lukan account, Jesus instructs his disciples to wait in Jerusalem for God to pour out his Spirit on them before launching out.

Imbued with power from on high, they were to spread the good news of kingdom renewal throughout “Jerusalem, Judea, Samaria, and to the ends of the earth” (Acts 1:8).