§6 The Baptism and Genealogy of Jesus (Luke 3:21–38)
Following John’s witness to Jesus (3:1–20), Luke provides three additional witnesses to Jesus’ messianic identity and mission: (1) the witness of Jesus’ own baptism, at which time the heavenly voice speaks (3:21–22); (2) the witness of his genealogy, which traces Jesus back to Adam, the son of God (3:23–38); and (3) the witness of Jesus’ temptation, in which the character and commitment of Jesus are tested (4:1–13). These components in the Lucan narrative testify to Jesus’ qualifications as Messiah and to his readiness to begin his ministry. The first two witnesses are examined in this section.
3:21–22 / Luke’s statement that Jesus was the last to be baptized (v. 21) is strategic. By mentioning John’s imprisonment so early in the narrative, an event which Mark (6:17–18) and Matthew (14:3–4) report much later, and by leaving the impression that Jesus is the last to be baptized, Luke succeeds in making a clean break between the end of John’s ministry and the beginning of Jesus’ ministry. The time of the Law and the Prophets is over; now the kingdom of God (which in Luke’s account John does not proclaim) can be preached (i.e., by Jesus, see Luke 16:16).
At the moment of Jesus’ baptism the Holy Spirit descended on him (v. 22a). This is the “anointing” which makes Jesus Messiah (i.e., “anointed one”; see Acts 10:38 and commentary on Luke 4:14–30 below). Tiede (p. 95) notes the parallel with 1 Sam. 10:1–10: “ ‘Has not the LORD anointed you to be prince over his people Israel?’ … and the spirit of God came mightily upon [Saul], and he prophesied among them” (RSV). With his anointing Jesus is prepared to face the hardships and challenges of his ministry (see Luke 4:1–13, 29–30 for examples of such challenges right at the outset of his ministry). Luke’s reference to the descent of the Spirit in bodily form like a dove (only Luke has “bodily form,” see Mark 1:10; Matt. 3:16) may emphasize that the descent of the Holy Spirit was real, not visionary. Although the words spoken by the voice from heaven (v. 22b) may allude to a royal enthronement psalm (i.e., Ps. 2:7; some mss. read “today I have begotten thee”), a feature which might signify the installation of the newly anointed Jesus as king (see Acts 13:33 where Ps. 2:7 is actually quoted in reference to Jesus), the words may also allude to Isa. 42:1, one of the Servant Song passages of Isaiah. (On the significance of the Servant Songs for Luke’s understanding of Jesus see commentary and notes on Luke 4:14–30 below.) The voice provides heavenly confirmation of Jesus’ appointment as Messiah (see note below). Fitzmyer (p. 483) suggests that just as the voice at the baptism precedes the Galilean ministry, so the voice (which utters the same words) at the transfiguration (see Luke 9:35) precedes the journey to Jerusalem: “In both scenes the heavenly identification stresses the relation of Jesus to his Father, as an important phase of his earthly career begins.”
Before leaving this part of Luke’s narrative we may inquire why Jesus was baptized at all, especially since John’s was a baptism of repentance and forgiveness of sins (3:3). That Jesus’ baptism came to be viewed with some uneasiness in the Gospel tradition is seen in the gradual distancing that takes place between John and Jesus. Whereas Mark simply states that Jesus was “baptized by John” (1:9), Matthew has the Baptist protest that he is unworthy to baptize Jesus (3:13–15). Luke omits explicit reference to baptism by John (3:21) and has John imprisoned at (or before?) the very beginning of Jesus’ ministry (3:19–20). Finally, in the Gospel of John the baptism of Jesus is omitted altogether, though the Baptist does witness the descent of the Spirit (1:29–34).
Another awkward aspect of the Baptist tradition is that not all of his disciples followed Jesus, and there is evidence that there was some rivalry between early Christians and the followers of John. (Acts 19:1–7 may represent Luke’s attempt at reconciling the Baptists and Christians.) However, because Jesus is anointed with the Spirit at the time of his baptism (and because of the close association of baptism with the Spirit in early Christianity, see 1 Cor. 12:13), the evangelists are reluctant to set it aside. It is probable that as part of his preparation for ministry, Jesus himself had been an actual follower of John. Prior to his anointing he was still in training (as he was as a young boy listening to and asking questions of the teachers in the temple, Luke 2:46–47). His baptism need not be interpreted as an acknowledgment of sin, but rather as a declaration of his commitment and readiness to begin his work. (The familiar explanations that Jesus’ baptism reveals his humanity, in that he identifies himself with humankind, or that his baptism symbolizes his taking the sin of the world upon himself [a view which may have some merit in interpreting the account in the Gospel of John], are scarcely supported by the Synoptic Gospel accounts.)
3:23–38 / Before launching into his account of Jesus’ temptation and ministry Luke inserts, almost like a footnote (see Marshall, p. 157), the genealogy of Jesus (see note below). Several difficulties attend Luke’s genealogy of Jesus. (Matthew’s genealogy offers its own problems.) It would be far beyond the scope and purpose of this commentary to analyze and solve these problems. For our purposes four major features are worth mentioning, primarily in comparison with the Matthean genealogy (see Matt. 1:2–16). (1) Whereas Matthew’s list of names descends from Abraham to Jesus, Luke’s list ascends from Jesus through Adam to God. (2) Because Luke’s list includes names from the period before Abraham it is much longer than Matthew’s list (77 names to 42). Even his list from Abraham to Jesus is longer than Matthew’s (56 names to 42). This difference is in large part explained by Matthew’s scheme of “fourteen generations” between major persons and events, a scheme which requires only a select list (see Matt. 1:17). (3) Even where overlap occurs (i.e., from Abraham to Jesus), only about half the names cited by Matthew and Luke are held in common. (4) Many of the Lucan names, especially in the period between Adam and Abraham, are not found in OT genealogies or in any known genealogical records. Where Luke, or the tradition before him, obtained these names is completely unknown.
The proposal made some 500 years ago (Annius of Viterbo, ca. 1490) that Matthew has given us Joseph’s genealogy, while Luke has given Mary’s, provides no real solutions to the problems enumerated above but only creates new ones. I would suggest that although we cannot completely explain (or harmonize) the Matthean and Lucan lists, at least not with the available sources, we should assume that both Matthew and Luke (or the tradition before them) made use of real records and registries. (For Matthew, of course, the OT provided most of the names.) Invented genealogies would serve no useful purpose and, being open to critical scrutiny of contemporaries, could have become a cause for embarrassment. Had Jesus’ genealogical records been unavailable, then in all probability Matthew and Luke would have been content without them (as were Mark and John).
But why does Luke provide us with a genealogy, and why does he locate it at this point in his Gospel? The answer to both parts of this question appears in the last (human) name on his list: Adam (v. 38). Because of his universalistic emphasis, Luke wishes to trace the lineage of Jesus back to the first human being, the father of all nations. When Luke refers to the promises made to Abraham he probably has in mind the blessings that will result for the Gentiles as well as for Israel (see Gen. 22:18 and commentary on 1:55, 73 above), but since the idea of Abraham as father of the Jewish race was so entrenched (and so presumed upon—remember the words of the Baptist in Luke 3:8), it would not have been in the best interests of his theology to culminate his genealogy of Jesus in Abraham. By going back to Adam, Luke finds biblical support for his presentation of Jesus as Savior of all humankind. Moreover, the title “son of man,” so popular in Luke’s Gospel (Jesus is called “son of man” in Luke twice as often as in the other Synoptic Gospels), may have suggested the propriety of including Adam’s name in the first place, since ’ādām in Hebrew literally means “man.” Therefore, Luke’s genealogy concludes appropriately, the son of Adam (or “man”).
This word-play explains why Luke places the genealogy where he does and why he arranges it in ascending order. Almost certainly he wishes to draw a contrasting parallel between Adam and Jesus, particularly with regard to their respective temptations. Whereas Adam, the first son of God (v. 38), fell into sin when tempted by the devil (Gen. 3:1–7; the “serpent” was understood by early Jews and Christians as the devil, see Rev 12:9; 20:2), Jesus the “son of man/Adam” (and “Son of God”; see Luke 4:3, 9), did not (see commentary on 4:1–13 below). Although it is not wise, nor in this case really necessary, to read Paul’s Adam/Christ typology into Luke (see Rom. 5:12–21), the ideas are quite similar and probably do have common roots.
Luke sees in Jesus’ baptism and anointing (3:21–22) and in his genealogy (3:23–38, with the emphasis on v. 38) Jesus’ preparation and validation for ministry. Jesus has been prepared (by the anointing of the Spirit) and validated (by the heavenly voice and by his genealogy), but now he must prove that he is truly qualified. The subsequent temptation narrative offers such proof.
3:21 / Both Mark (1:10) and Matthew (3:16) state that “immediately” after Jesus emerges from the waters of baptism the “Spirit descended,” thus linking the baptism very closely to the descent of the Spirit. Luke, however, breaks this link by inserting the phrase, as he was praying. This is yet another indication that Luke, as are Matthew and John in their own ways, is trying to play down Jesus’ relation to or dependence upon the Baptist. Luke simply tells us that Jesus was baptized (perhaps by John, perhaps not), and then (later), while he prayed, the heavens opened and the Spirit descended. Luke possibly sees a parallel here with the apostles who pray and shortly thereafter receive the Spirit (see Acts 1:14; 2:1–4).
Jesus was baptized too: Some evidence suggests that early Christians found Jesus’ baptism somewhat embarrassing, either because it implied that Jesus, like his fellow Israelites, needed to repent, or because it implied that Jesus was in some sense subordinate to John. All four of the NT Gospels give evidence of this sensitivity: In Mark 1:7–8 the Baptist freely acknowledges his unworthiness in comparison to Jesus; in Matt. 3:14–15 the Baptist expresses his wish to be baptized by Jesus; in John 1:29–34 the Baptist hails Jesus as the “Lamb of God” upon whom he saw the Spirit descend; and in Luke 3:21 the Baptist is dropped from the scene altogether; we are not told that he baptized Jesus. Indeed, according to v. 20 John has already been imprisoned, and therefore probably did not baptize Jesus. This same concern over the implications of Jesus’ baptism shows up in later Christian gospels. For example, in the Gospel according to the Hebrews, when invited by his family to join them in John’s baptism, Jesus asks: “What have I committed that I should be baptized by him, unless it be that in saying this I am in ignorance?” (from Jerome, Against Pelagius 3:2, cited by Leaney, p. 237).
3:22 / like a dove: Talbert (p. 40) notes that the dove was a symbol of God’s love for Jesus.
a voice came from heaven: The OT has examples of God speaking to Israel, the most dramatic example being the giving of the Ten Commandments (see Exod. 19:16–20:20; Deut. 4:12). Later there developed in Judaism the belief that God would occasionally speak from heaven (usually like a clap of thunder, see John 12:28) in order to confirm some important statement. Lachs (p. 47) thinks that this Christian tradition is such an instance. He cites the Tosefta, tractate Hagiga 2.5, as an example.
When the heavenly voice claims Jesus as my Son, whom I love, his adoption is not in view. That is to say, when the Spirit descended and the voice spoke, Jesus did not at that moment become God’s Son. For Luke, Jesus was God’s Son from his very conception (see 1:35). At his baptism Jesus is anointed by the Spirit, an anointing which is both symbolic (like a coronation) and enabling; while the voice does not adopt Jesus as God’s Son, it identifies Jesus as God’s Son (thus confirming the promise of 1:35).
There is no solid evidence that Ps. 2:7 was understood in a messianic sense prior to Christianity (Fitzmyer, p. 485). Ellis (pp. 91–92) has argued that the references to “my son the Messiah” in 2 Esdras 7:28–29 provide some evidence. But is Psalm 2 in mind? 1QSa 2.11–12 may allude to Ps. 2:7 (“when [God] begets the Messiah among them”), but the text is uncertain; see Fitzmyer, p. 339. The rabbis, however, interpret Ps. 2:7 messianically (see b. Sukkah 52a; Midrash Psalms 2.9 [on 2:7]). This is evidence that Christian interpretation of Ps. 2:7 was not entirely novel, unless we assume that the rabbis either borrowed from Christian exegesis or independently arrived at the same interpretation. Either assumption is implausible.
3:23a / Luke notes that Jesus himself was about thirty years old when he began his ministry, not because of his customary interest in chronology (as seen in 1:5; 2:1–2; 3:1–2), but probably because Num. 4:3 states that men must be at least thirty years of age to “enter the service, to do the work in the tent of meeting” (RSV). Luke wishes the reader to know that Jesus was the right age to begin his “service” and “work.”
3:23b–38 / There really is no rule concerning where a genealogy should appear within a narrative; some precede the narrative, as does Matthew’s (see also e.g., Gen. 11:10–29, where Abraham’s genealogy is listed before his story begins in 11:31; perhaps Matthew followed this specific example); some appear within the narrative (e.g., although the story of Moses begins with his birth in Exod. 2:1–2, it is not until Exod. 6:14–20 that we are provided his genealogy); and some appear at the end of the narrative (e.g., Ruth 4:18–22).
Because of his own humble ancestry, Herod the Great confiscated and destroyed most of the records of Davidic descent, fearing a claim to the throne more worthy than his own. This jealousy and fear for his throne is dramatically illustrated in Matt. 2:1–18.
3:23b / of Joseph: We are told that Joseph was of Davidic descent (1:27; 2:4; cf. Matt. 1:20). After the infancy narrative and the story of the boy Jesus in the temple (Luke 2:41–52), Joseph drops out of the picture (though Jesus is still identified as “Joseph’s son”; see Luke 4:22). It is usually assumed that Joseph died before Jesus’ public ministry commenced. Joseph figures prominently in later Christian apocryphal traditions; e.g., The Infancy Gospel of Thomas, The History of Joseph the Carpenter, etc.
Heli: According to Matt. 1:16 Joseph’s father was Jacob.
3:24–26 / Matthat … Joda: Nothing is known about these persons. They are not to be confused with biblical characters of the same name (such as Levi, Amos, or Nahum). It is not likely that Matthat is to be identified with Matthan of Matt. 1:15.
3:27 / Joanan, the son of Rhesa: Leaney (p. 112) and others have suggested that Rhesa is meant to be the Aramaic word for “prince” and that the original read “Prince Joanan, son of Zerubbabel.” If this were true, then Hananiah in 1 Chron. 3:19 may have been the intended person. (Luke actually follows the spelling for Zerubbabel’s name that is found in 1 Chron. 3:19.) Fitzmyer (p. 500), however, rightly regards this proposal as speculative and problematic. Therefore, nothing is known about Joanan or Rhesa.
Zerubbabel: The name means “offspring of Babylon,” referring to his birth in the land of the Jewish captivity (Ezra 2:2). He served as governor of Judea after Cyrus’ decree permitted the Jews to return to their homeland (ca. 520 B.C.).
Shealtiel: The name means “I have asked God” (for this child). Luke says that he was the son of Neri; Matthew (1:12) and 1 Chronicles (LXX 3:17) have him as the son of Jeconiah. Luke’s Neri is unknown. Matthew’s Jeconiah is the son of Jehoiakim, among the last of the Davidic rulers.
3:28–31 / Melchi … Mattatha: Nothing is known of these persons; their names appear in no known genealogical lists.
3:31 / Nathan: David’s third son (2 Sam. 5:14; 1 Chron. 3:5). Here lies a major discrepancy between the Matthean and Lucan genealogies. Matthew (1:6) traces Jesus’ line through Solomon, not through Nathan. Fitzmyer (p. 501) suspects that Luke has avoided the royal line from Solomon from to Jeconiah either because of the criticisms of some of these kings or because of prophetic oracles (e.g., Jer. 22:28–30; 36:30–31) that foretell the demise of the Davidic line.
David: Matthew’s genealogy centers on David (Matt. 1:1, 6, 17). Luke, however, attaches no special significance to the famous founder of a dynasty that survived some four centuries (despite the fact that there were important references to David and the Davidic covenant in the infancy narrative; 1:32–33, 69; 2:11.) For the story of David see 1 Samuel 16–1 Kings 2 (=1 Chron. 11–29). “David” eventually came to be understood as archetype of the Messiah; see Isa. 9:6–7; 11:1–2; Ezek. 34:23, 24; 37:24, 25.
3:32 / Jesse: What little is known of David’s father comes from 1 Sam. 16:1–20; 17:12–18. Jesse’s hometown was Bethlehem (1 Sam. 16:1).
Obed: Obed is the grandfather of David; see Ruth 4:17, 21–22. He was the son of Ruth and Boaz.
Boaz: Boaz was a wealthy man of Bethlehem who married the widow Ruth from Moab; see Ruth 2–4.
Salmon: 1 Chron. 2:11.
Nahshon: Nahshon, whose sister married Aaron, assisted Moses in taking the census in the wilderness; see Exod. 6:23; Num. 1:7.
3:33 / Amminadab: According to 1 Chron. 2:10 and Matt. 1:4 Amminadab (see Num. 1:7) was the son of Ram (or Aram), but according to Luke (at least according to some mss.) he was the son of Admin, son of Arni (see note in NIV). Here is yet another discrepancy that is not easily explained. The NIV harmonizes Luke’s genealogy by reading “son of Ram.” This reading, however, is itself likely an attempt on the part of early scribes to bring about such an agreement.
Ram: Other than the appearance of his name in the genealogies of Ruth (4:19) and 1 Chronicles (2:9–10) nothing is known of this person. The Lucan genealogy probably originally read “Admin, son of Arni” (see Fitzmyer, p. 502), persons of whom absolutely nothing is known. The ms. tradition is very confused at this point.
Hezron: Hezron was a leader of the tribe of Judah (Gen. 46:12; Num. 26:21). Fitzmyer (p. 502) suspects that his name may mean “the Lean One.”
Perez: Perez (“A Breach”) and Zerah were twins born to Judah and Tamar (Gen. 38:29). Tamar had been the wife of one of Judah’s sons.
Judah: Fourth son of Jacob (Gen. 29:35) and the patriarch after whom the tribe of Judah derives its name, a name which apparently means “Praise the Lord.” For the biblical story of his life see Genesis 37–38.
3:34 / Jacob: Jacob, the great patriarch whose name was changed to Israel (Gen. 32:28), was the son of Isaac and Rebekah and twin brother of Esau. According to Gen. 25:26 the name Jacob means either “He Who Takes by the Heel” or “the Supplanter.” For the biblical story of his life see Genesis 25–35, 45–49.
Isaac: Isaac was the son of the aged Abraham and Sarah. For the biblical story of his life see Genesis 21–28. Perhaps the best known episode in his life was when he was nearly offered up as a sacrifice by his father Abraham (Gen. 22:1–19).
Abraham: Abraham was the father of the Hebrew race. Prior to the birth of Isaac, Abraham’s name was Abram (“Great Father”), before Isaac’s birth God appeared to the patriarch (Gen. 17:1–21) and changed his name to Abraham (“Father of a multitude”). Although important allusions to the Abrahamic covenant are found in the infancy narrative (1:55, 73), Luke attaches no more significance to the name of Abraham here in the genealogy than he does to the name of David. For the biblical story of Abraham’s life see Genesis 12–25.
Terah: For the names from Terah to Arphaxad, Luke is apparently drawing upon Gen. 11:10–26 and 1 Chron. 1:24–27. According to Gen. 11:31–32 Terah took his family to Haran, the place from which God would later call Abraham.
Nahor: Beyond the appearance of this man’s name in Abraham’s genealogy (Gen. 11:22; 1 Chron. 1:26) nothing is known of him. Fitzmyer (p. 502) notes that Nahor is a Mesopotamian name.
3:35 / Serug: See Gen. 11:20; 1 Chron. 1:26.
Reu: See Gen. 11:18; 1 Chron. 1:25. Fitzmyer (p. 503) suggests that the name is a shortened form or Reuel or Reuyah, meaning “Friend of God” or “Friend of the Lord.”
Peleg: See Gen. 11:16; 1 Chron. 1:25. The name meant “Division”; see Gen. 10:25.
Eber: See Gen. 10:25; 11:17; 1 Chron. 1:25. It is from his name that the name “Hebrew” is derived, which in turn means “region beyond” (Fitzmyer, p. 503).
Shelah: See Gen. 11:15; 1 Chron. 1:24.
3:36 / Cainan: This name is only found in LXX Gen. 10:24; 11:12. According to the Hebrew text, Shelah is the son of Arphaxad. The name does appear earlier at 1 Chron. 1:2 (“Kenan”). See v. 37 below.
Arphaxad: Third son of Shem; see Gen. 11:12; 1 Chron. 1:24 (“Arpachshad”).
Shem: One of the three sons of Noah, from whom the Semitic peoples descended. See Gen. 11:10; 1 Chron. 1:4, 24.
Noah: See Gen. 5:29, 32; 10:1; 1 Chron. 1:4. Because of Noah’s righteousness God spared Noah and his family; see Genesis 6–9. According to the early and fragmentary columns of the Genesis Apocryphon (1QapGen) Noah’s birth was marvelous, portending things to come. He reportedly lived 950 years.
Lamech: See Gen. 5:25, 28; 1 Chron. 1:3. He reportedly lived 777 years.
3:37 / Methuselah: See Gen. 5:21; 1 Chron. 1:3. Methuselah reportedly lived 969 years, the longest life of all of those who lived before the Flood. His Akkadian name probably means “man of God” (Fitzmyer, p. 503).
Enoch: See Gen. 5:18; 1 Chron. 1:3. Enoch is the righteous man who apparently did not die but was taken up to heaven after living 365 years (Gen. 5:24; Sir. 49:14; Jude 14). Various pseudepigraphal works are named after this mysterious figure.
Jared: See Gen. 5:15; 1 Chron. 1:2. He reportedly lived 962 years.
Mahalalel: See Gen. 5:13; 1 Chron. 1:2. He reportedly lived 895 years.
Kenan: See Gen. 5:9; 1 Chron. 1:2. He reportedly lived 910 years.
3:38 / Enosh: See Gen. 5:6; 1 Chron. 1:1. He reportedly lived 905 years.
Seth: See Gen. 5:3; 1 Chron. 1:1. He reportedly lived 912 years.
Adam: See Gen. 1:26–27; 2:7; 5:1; 1 Chron. 1:1. Adam, the father of the human race, reportedly lived 930 years.
God: Luke has traced Jesus’ genealogy back to the Creator himself; see Gen. 1:1, 26–27; 2:7.
For a thorough study of the infancy narratives, including the genealogies of Jesus, the reader is encouraged to see Raymond E. Brown, The Birth of the Messiah: A Commentary on the Infancy Narratives in Matthew and Luke (Garden City: Doubleday, 1977).