Authorised

Mark 1:11

‘At that time Jesus came from Nazareth in Galilee and was baptized by John in the Jordan. Just as Jesus was coming up out of the water, he saw heaven being torn open and the Spirit descending on him like a dove. And a voice came from heaven: “You are my Son, whom I love; with you I am well pleased.”

‘At once the Spirit sent him out into the wilderness, and he was in the wilderness forty days, being tempted by Satan. He was with the wild animals, and angels attended him.‘

(Mark 1:9-13, NIV, verse 11 highlighted)

This is a pivotal moment in the long haul of salvation history. A plan long laid (since before the foundation of the world) is about to launch; and like any mission, the moment of “Go / No Go” is hugely significant. Do we launch the astronauts atop their high-explosive missile? Do we drop the Marines behind enemy lines? Well, we’d better be sure; lives are at stake, not just the success of the mission.

And do we launch the one and only Son of God into direct contact and confrontation with the Ruler of this World; the same one who so easily stripped Adam of his role and rule? Jesus is about to cross a line; from here on there can be no turning back or change of plan.

As it stands in our English translations, God speaks at this moment to encourage Jesus; and I would be the last person to query the value of that. But there are two problems with the language of Mark 1:11, and I think that if we look carefully, we will see that the Father’s intervention is more significant than just an encouraging word. This is the Commander in Chief stating that His prior authorisation of this mission stands, and that His Son is cleared for this mission.

Let’s break this down. Here is the Greek of verse 11:

καὶ φωνὴ ἐγένετο ἐκ τῶν οὐρανῶν· Σὺ εἶ ὁ υἱός μου ὁ ἀγαπητός, ἐν σοὶ εὐδόκησα.

“And a voice came from the heavens, “You are My Son, ὁ ἀγαπητός, in you εὐδόκησα.

Let’s start with ὁ ἀγαπητός. I have referenced before the problems with Christians assuming that ἀγαπάω and ἀγάπη are just as simple as the love of God for us and vice versa. ἀγαπάω does mean greet with affection, or hold the departed in affection, but it also means “to put up with”. And ἀγαπητός is worse: its core meaning is “that which one must put up with” or as Liddell and Scott has it, “that wherewith one must be content”.

Am I suggesting that God is saying, “you are my Son, I guess I will have to be satisfied with that”? No, of course not. This word, because of its core meaning, is used often in reference to an only child – I suspect originally because of the Greek tendency to talk down things they valued (lest the gods become jealous), and to talk kindly of things they feared, like the sky at night, (lest the “kindly stars” work some evil against them).

If you have followed the logic, then you will realise that the earthly father who says “you are my son, I need to be content with that” is actually saying “you are my only son, and yes, I love you.” But the key reference is to being an only son. So I would argue that in this case, the Father is saying ὁ ἀγαπητός, meaning “My only Son”, and that ὁ ἀγαπητός here is more or less equivalent to μονογενής, which is often rendered as only-begotten in John 1:14 but actually means “the only one of a kindred”.

Why does this matter? Jesus had been born as a baby thirty-some years earlier. He has submitted Himself to John’s Baptism, and immediately upon leaving the water sees the heavens torn open and the Spirit of God descend upon Him in the form of a dove. And at this crucial moment, God the Father speaks and confirms “You are My Son, the only one I have.”

In any other father’s mouth, the next words might be “don’t do it, come home son! You are the only one I have…” Here, the Father is confirming to Jesus, as He is reunited with God’s Spirit, “you are my only son: there is no Plan B nor is there any backup for what you are about to embark upon.” So what does He say next?

“In you εὐδόκησα.” And εὐδόκησα is aorist indicative active. It is safe to summarise this tense as “punctiliar past”, meaning it happened at a point in time. (I say safe because I remain entirely unconvinced by arguments – referencing other passages than this one – that the aorist can be rendered with an English present tense). So if we take εὐδόκησα as “to be pleased”, then it would have to mean, “in you I was pleased (at a particular point in time).”

Okay, but what about now? If the Father was saying “In you I am well pleased”, then that would surely use the Present, ἐν σοὶ εὐδοκέω. If He wanted to signify “I have always been pleased with You”, then surely the perfect tense would fit; but the aorist is so specifically about a point in time in the past. (I shot the sheriff, I won the race, I married my wife – those would all call for a Greek aorist). At the very least, “I was pleased with you, back then” is a little odd in the context.

So what point-in-the-past meaning of εὐδόκησα would fit here? As it happens, εὐδοκέω is a legal term in one of its main applications, about the giving of consent before the courts or in other legal contexts. (“I consent to the transfer of such and such a property to my daughter’s husband”). So what about, “in you I gave my consent”?

As an aside, we should probably be using this reading elsewhere. Luke 12:32 reads Μὴ φοβοῦ, τὸ μικρὸν ποίμνιον, ὅτι εὐδόκησεν ὁ πατὴρ ὑμῶν δοῦναι ὑμῖν τὴν βασιλείαν. Once again, εὐδοκέω appears in the aorist indicative active, so I would render this “Don’t fear, O little flock, because the Father [already] consented to give to you the Kingdom.” It isn’t just that the Father is pleased to let you have it, as most versions have it; it is a done deal, already authorised.

So where does this leave us?

At this juncture in time, when it would be “mission-critical” for Jesus to know that He fully understood all the Father had instructed Him to do, His voice comes from heaven, confirming to Jesus that:

You are my Son, the only one, no backups or Plan Bs available;
and yes, in the act of sending you to become a man,
I already gave my authorisation and consent;

Son, you are cleared for action.