‘After these things Jesus and His disciples came into the land of Judea, and there he stayed for a time with them and baptised.'
The land of Judea is in Southern Palestine, below Samaria. Galilee was above Samaria in northern Palestine. Across the Jordan from Judea was Perea. All are differentiated from Jerusalem which looked on itself as a city on its own. This had been true from the days of David, when Jerusalem was his own personal possession having been taken by him from the Jebusites, and not being a part of Israel or Judah (see Mark 1:5 and often in the Old Testament).
Thus Jesus may have ‘come into the land' of Judea from Jerusalem. It is significant that until John 6:1 John makes no mention of a Galilean ministry. He does of course mention the visit to Cana and Capernaum in chapter 2, which appears to have been for a few days, and he will mention a further visit in John 5:43-47, but there is only the slightest suggestion of any ministry there in that we are told that ‘the Galileans welcomed Him' (John 4:45). Nothing further is said. There is no suggestion of a public ministry.
This agrees with Mark's statement that Jesus' Galilean ministry, of which the other Gospels are full, commenced after John the Baptiser was put in prison (Mark 1:14), which has not yet happened at this stage as he is still baptising at Aenon near Salim (John 3:23).
Thus we have in John's Gospel valuable new material about the beginnings of Jesus' ministry which is not mentioned by the other Gospels. It demonstrates that His first ministry was in Judea, and carried out in parallel with, and alongside, John the Baptiser's. It may suggest that, while He clearly had a following of ‘disciples' at this point (some of whom would leave him - John 6:66), that may not have included many of the twelve. We cannot, in fact, be certain which of the twelve were with Him. They are never mentioned until John 6:67 where they are looked on as a specific unit, and this is after we know that the Galilean ministry has been in progress for some time (John 6:1).
This agrees with the other Gospel accounts where the twelve are appointed before the feeding of the crowds, but clearly after the first Judean ministry. In John 6:67 John just assumes that the appointment of the twelve will be known to his readers.
Furthermore, it is clear that John is very sparse in his dealings with the Galilean ministry. Except when it suits his purpose he leaves it out of the reckoning. This is because he is not trying to write a full scale life of Jesus, but is drawing on material of which he has special knowledge in order to present Jesus to his readers in a certain way. If he writes long after the others, as some think, he would, of course, be aware that the details of the Galilean ministry were already public knowledge in the churches. But hiowever that may, be he is happy to ignore them for his purposes. Yet he constantly assumes what is in the Galilean tradition, for he mentions such things as John's imprisonment as a matter of course rather than as new information (John 3:24). Note also how in chapter 5 He is in Jerusalem and then in John 6:1 he is suddenly continuing a Galilean ministry.
‘There he remained with them and baptised.' Jesus is at this stage carrying on a similar ministry to John the Baptiser, identifying Himself with the work of John. The work of the Spirit which that baptism symbolises has already begun. This is evident from the constant mention of the Spirit in John's Gospel (John 3:5-6; John 4:24; John 6:63) and in His indication that ‘the life of the age to come' is available already (John 3:15). Indeed it is evident in John's ministry also. But as yet it is to a certain extent localised and not the great outpouring that was to follow the resurrection (John 7:39). To suggest that somehow this ministry was not effective in the power of the Spirit, but simply symbolic, is to ignore the evidence of both Old and New Testament that the Spirit has worked through the ages.
The new age of the Spirit would be notable for the power manifested and its widespread nature, but it was not a totally new work. Ezekiel in John 18:31 could tell his listeners ‘cast away all the transgressions you have committed against me, and get yourselves a new heart and a new spirit', which in view of Ezekiel 36:26-27 must mean the work of God's Spirit. Compare also Psalms 51:10-12; Psalms 139:7; Psalms 143:10 and the mention of Holy Spirit inspired people in the early Chapter s of Luke.
While baptism is important as a commitment to God and to a new way of living, and a declaration of a desire to take part in the pouring out of the Spirit, it is that inner work that is most important. As Paul makes clear, to him baptism is secondary to preaching the Gospel, for it is the latter which produces the saving work which the former confirms (1 Corinthians 1:17-18).
It is stated in John 4:2 that Jesus Himself did not baptise, but left the responsibility to His disciples. Aware of His special status, it would certainly have been wise for Jesus to leave baptising to His disciples, as otherwise all kinds of problems could arise as people fought to be baptised by Him. Jesus knew what was in men. He would therefore know very well the complications that could arise later if some people had been specifically baptised by Him. We can compare how Paul clearly left the baptising of people to others (1 Corinthians 1:11-17) and was thankful that he had done so. Thus this is not a case of special pleading.
We do not know how such baptisms were carried out although we know they required ‘much water' (v. 23). It seems probable therefore that people went down into the water. Perhaps the water was poured over them, symbolic of rain, or possibly they were dipped under the water. It is probable that John's disciples also acted on John's behalf as well in the work of baptising. In view of the great crowds this seems likely.