3:21 Jesus is baptized while all the others are being baptized, suggesting that he identifies with Israel in his baptism. We have already seen that John’s baptism signifies repentance leading to forgiveness of sins (Luke 3:3). John baptizes Jesus (cf. Matt. 3:13–15; Mark 1:9), but Luke has already removed John from the narrative and thus omits this fact. Jesus’ baptism must be an act of identification instead of repentance since he has no need for repentance. He dies as the innocent one, as one who does not deserve punishment, as the holy and righteous one (Luke 23:4, 14, 22; Acts 3:14; 4:27; 7:52; 22:14). We will see evidence in Luke 3:22 that he is the servant of the Lord, suggesting that he dies for the sake of his people.

When Jesus is being baptized, he is praying—perhaps for the Holy Spirit to anoint and empower him for ministry. Key events in the Gospel occur when Jesus prays: he prays regularly during his ministry (5:16), he prays all night before selecting his disciples (6:12–16), he prays before asking his disciples about his identity (9:18–20), he prays when he is transfigured (9:28–29), he is praying when his disciples ask him how to pray (11:1), he prays for Simon’s faith (22:32), and he prays in Gethsemane (22:41, 44, 45).

While Jesus is praying on this instance, heaven opens. The opening of heaven signals a revelation of God. Ezekiel and John the apostle see visions when heaven is opened (Ezek. 1:1; Rev. 4:1). Jesus promises his disciples that they will see the angels ascending and descending upon him when heaven opens (John 1:51; cf. Gen. 28:12). Heaven opens and Peter sees a vision of a sheet with all kinds of animals (Acts 10:11–12), indicating that the foods unclean during the OT period are now permitted. When heaven opens, Jesus will come riding on a white horse and will destroy his enemies (Rev. 19:11). Thus the opened heavens at Jesus’ baptism signifies that God is about to speak in a powerful way.

3:22 As Jesus is being baptized and praying and the heavens open, the Holy Spirit descends on Jesus. The Spirit comes in a symbolic and visible way like a dove. This imagery probably represents the inauguration of a new creation, just as the dove was released from Noah’s ark upon the inauguration of the new world after the flood (Gen. 8:8–12). The picture also probably alludes to Genesis 1:2, in which God’s Spirit hovers like a bird over the world God is about to form and shape. Isaiah predicted that the Spirit of the Lord would rest upon the Messiah, and thus the coming of the Spirit signifies Jesus’ anointing and empowering for ministry (Isa. 61:1). The divine voice also signals the importance of the occasion (cf. Luke 9:35).

The heavenly voice clearly comes from the Father, who identifies Jesus as his Son. This is a clear allusion to Psalm 2:7, in which the messianic king is adopted as God’s son when installed as king (cf. 2 Sam. 7:14). Jesus’ sonship, however, goes beyond his Davidic rule, for he is also the unique Son of God, God’s special and beloved Son (Luke 9:35; 20:13; cf. Gen. 22:2). He is the beloved Son (cf. Isa. 41:8; 44:2). Jesus is not only the Son but also the servant of the Lord, as we see in the Servant Songs of Isaiah (41:8–9, 18–20; 44:1–2; 45:4; 49:5–6; 50:4–9; 52:13–53:12). The servant in Isaiah is Israel, but he also transcends Israel; the servant is Isaiah the prophet, but he also transcends the prophet. Finally, the servant is one who bears and atones for the sin of Israel, as Isaiah 52:13–53:12 demonstrates. Here Luke picks up Isaiah 42:1, which speaks of the servant in whom God “delights,” and affirms that the Lord has given the servant his Spirit. Jesus is the Spirit-endowed Son and Servant, the King, the one uniquely related to God, and as the servant the one who atones for the sins of Israel.

3:23–38 This genealogy traces Jesus’ origins. Luke tells us that Jesus begins his ministry when around thirty years of age, which reminds us of the age at which David began to reign as king (2 Sam. 5:4). Calling Jesus the “supposed” biological son of Joseph affirms the virgin conception. It is difficult to see any clear structure in Luke’s genealogy—as opposed to Matthew’s, in which those named are separated into three groups of fourteen (Matt. 1:1–17). Matthew begins with David and Abraham and concludes with Jesus, but Luke travels in the other direction, beginning with Jesus and ending with God.

A few features of Luke’s genealogy should be noted. By going all the way back to Adam, he emphasizes the universality of Jesus’ mission, for Jesus has come for both Jews and Gentiles; such a reading is borne out by the rest of Luke-Acts. We also see a connection with Jesus’ baptism, at which he is declared to be God’s Son, for the genealogy concludes with God, suggesting that Jesus is God’s Son. It is rightly observed that we cannot press this too far, since Adam in the genealogy is identified as God’s son as well. Certainly, Jesus as a son of Adam is identified here as a human being. On the other hand, Luke is making a theological point, and it is evident from the entire narrative that Jesus is God’s Son in a deeper and more profound way than was Adam. In the next account Satan will tempt Jesus by asking if he is God’s Son, and so we again see the comparison and contrast between Jesus and Adam. In the Lukan genealogy Jesus is related to David through Nathan instead of Solomon, which probably signifies his humble origins.43

A baffling question concerns how the Lukan genealogy fits with Matthew’s, as they clearly and obviously differ from one another.44 Some have claimed that Luke gives the genealogy through Mary and Matthew through Joseph, but this is unlikely since Mary is not even mentioned in Luke.45 Various other attempts have been made to reconcile the genealogies, and the entire discussion is quite complicated.46 Most think we have a royal genealogy in Matthew and a physical genealogy in Luke. The two accounts are often harmonized by appealing to levirate marriage (cf. Deut. 25:5–6), by which a brother provides an heir for his deceased brother. The genealogy may differ, then, because Matthew follows the royal line and Luke the biological ancestry. This is probably the best solution, though certainty eludes us. Admitting that we do not know how the two genealogies fit together does not mean that one or both of them is mistaken. To do so is simply to acknowledge that our knowledge is partial, that it is not the purpose of the Gospels to resolve this matter, and that a number of different scenarios could explain the differences.