John The Baptist, Ministry of John the Baptist

WHAT WAS THE BACKGROUND OF JOHN THE BAPTIST

John's Background John was born to aged Jewish parents, Zacharias and Elizabeth, who were of a priestly family (Lk. 1:5). Clearly, John's conception was miraculous; incidentally, he was about six months older than Jesus (1:26).

WHAT WAS THE MISSION OF JOHN THE BAPTIST?

John's Mission John's mission can be summed up by one word, "preparer."

TELL ME ABOUT THE DEMEANOR OF JOHN THE BAPTIST

The Demeanor of John The description of John is brief and stark. It was, however, quite reminiscent of the adornment of certain Old Testament prophets (Zech. 13:4), particularly Elijah, who, as we have noted, foreshadowed John (cf. 2 Kgs. 1:8). Too, John was somewhat reclusive. Jesus once said: "John came neither eating nor drinking, and they say, He has a demon" (Mt. 11:18). This passage appears to indicate that John did not perform demonstrative miracles, as Jesus and the apostles did (cf. Mt. 10:1ff). The power of John's preaching, together with the void in Israel's hearts, was a winning combination.

WHO WAS JOHN THE BAPTIST?

Who Was John the Baptist? His name was divinely given. It was to be "John" (Lk. 1:13), which derives from a Hebrew term signifying "Jehovah is gracious." He was known familiarly as "the Baptist" (bearing no relation to the modern sect), which simply means "an immerser, one who administers the rite of immersion" (see Mt. 3:1; 11:11; etc.). The Jewish historian Josephus even refers to John by this designation (Antiquities 18.5.2). The importance of John in the divine scheme of things probably is summed up best in the testimony of Jesus himself. "Among them that are born of women there has not arisen a greater than John the Baptist . . ." (Mt. 11:11). John's Background John was born to aged Jewish parents, Zacharias and Elizabeth, who were of a priestly family (Lk. 1:5). Interestingly, Elizabeth was related to Mary, the mother of Jesus (Lk. 1:36). This devout couple lived in the "hill country" of Judea (Lk. 1:39), perhaps Hebron, a priestly city of the region. Luke has a wonderful summary statement of the character of this Hebrew couple. "And they were both righteous before God, walking in all the commandments and ordinances of the Lord blameless" (1:6). On the occasion of Zacharias' exercise of his duty of burning incense in the temple at Jerusalem (a once-in-a-lifetime event for a priest), the angel Gabriel appeared to the elderly gentleman, informing him that his prayers had been heard, and that his wife would bear a son (1:13). One must necessarily infer that Zecharias had prayed for such in earlier times, though Elizabeth was barren, and both of them now were advanced in age (1:7). Clearly, John's conception was miraculous; incidentally, he was about six months older than Jesus (1:26). It was foretold that this child would be filled with the Spirit of God, even from his mother's womb, and that he would be reared under the strict code of the Nazirite (cf. Num. 6:1-21), an indication of the solemnity of his role in preparing the way for the world's Redeemer. The Scriptures are silent as to the deaths of John's parents - though legend has it that Zacharias was slain by Herod the Great, forcing Elizabeth to flee with her babe into the wilderness area of Judea. Luke does say of John: "And the child grew, and waxed strong in spirit, and was in the deserts till the day of his showing unto Israel" (1:80). This desert (or deserted) area "stretches from Jerusalem and Bethlehem eastward some 20 miles down to the Jordan River and the Dead Sea"; it is "a barren region of rugged hills and valleys" (Earle, 30). John in Prophecy Any Hebrew familiar with his Old Testament could have expected the ministry of John as a preliminary measure in the divine plan, paving the way for the appearance of the Messiah. Note the following. (1) Seven centuries before the birth of Jesus, the prophet Isaiah spoke of "the voice of one that crieth," indeed, of him who would "prepare in the wilderness the way of Jehovah," and "make level in the desert a highway for our God" (Isa. 40:3). While many commentators find in this prediction an immediate application to Judah's return from the Babylonian captivity, the New Testament writers see in it an ultimate fulfillment in the preparatory work of John the Baptizer (cf. Mt. 3:3; Mk. 1:2-3; Lk. 3:4-6; Jn. 1:23). As professor Webb has observed, with the coming of Jesus, these words "sprang to life again with deeper and fuller meaning." He comments further: "Although there was a partial return from exile in the years following 539 B.C., spiritually the exile continued until the Messiah came. Only he could solve the deep, underlying problem" (164). John, therefore, was a key figure in the preparation of the Messiah's work. (2) In the concluding book of the Old Testament, Malachi, on behalf of God, declared: "Behold, I send my messenger, and he shall prepare the way before me: and the Lord, who ye seek, will suddenly come to his temple; and the Messenger of the covenant, whom ye desire, behold, he comes, saith Jehovah" (3:1). First, note the distinction between the "messenger" who prepares the way, and the "Messenger of the Covenant," for whom the way is prepared. The former is a reference to John, the latter is an allusion to Christ. Second, Malachi's prophecy regarding the "messenger" is clearly parallel in principle to that of Isaiah (cited above), which, as we have shown, focused in the ministry of John. Third, the prophet later refers to this "messenger" as "Elijah the prophet" (4:4-5). In the New Testament we have the testimony of the angel Gabriel (Lk. 1:16), and that of Christ himself (Mt. 11:12-15), that this "Elijah" to come was none other than John. Truly: "There came a man, sent from God, whose name was John" (Jn. 1:6). The Demeanor of John The description of John is brief and stark. He was arrayed in a "camel's hair" garment, secured by a leather belt, and his diet was locusts and wild honey (Mt. 3:4). The "hair" cloak might have been a rough fabric woven from camel's hair, or a camel skin itself. The text is ambiguous. It was, however, quite reminiscent of the adornment of certain Old Testament prophets (Zech. 13:4), particularly Elijah, who, as we have noted, foreshadowed John (cf. 2 Kgs. 1:8). His dietary fare was that generally consumed by the poorer elements of society. He stood in bold relief to the wealthy, indulgent Jews of his day; he was a veritable walking sermon! Too, John was somewhat reclusive. Jesus once said: "John came neither eating nor drinking, and they say, He has a demon" (Mt. 11:18). "Eating and drinking" stood for socializing. The prophet was not a party-goer. His ascetic life-style appeared almost demonic, like those possessed of evil spirits who apparently frequented the desolate areas (cf. Mk. 5:2-3). He did not seek out the multitudes; rather, somehow, he attracted them. The citizenry of Jerusalem and all Judea went out unto him as he moved about in the Jordan Valley (Mt. 3:5; cf. 13; Jn. 1:28; 3:23). The imperfect tense verb, rendered "went out" (Mt. 3:5), suggests a stream of auditors gravitating to the rough prophet. His influence was phenomenal. Hundreds, if not thousands, were immersed by him. And his success was solely in the message he proclaimed. The multitudes said that he performed no "sign," though they regarded his message concerning Christ as true (Jn. 10:41). This passage appears to indicate that John did not perform demonstrative miracles, as Jesus and the apostles did (cf. Mt. 10:1ff). It is certainly the case, however, that his message was from God, and thus infallibly true. The power of John's preaching, together with the void in Israel's hearts, was a winning combination. It must be observed at this point that the common modern allegation that John was identified with the Essene community (e.g., those at Qumran) cannot be established. The differences between John's message and activities, and those of this sect of Judaism, are as significant as any alleged similarities. John's Mission John's mission can be summed up by one word, "preparer." It was his happy chore to prepare a people for the coming Messiah. Both Isaiah and Malachi had announced that he would "prepare" the way for the coming of "Jehovah" - a firm affirmation, incidentally, of the deity of Jesus. The angel Gabriel had informed Zecharias that his son would be instrumental in turning many unto the Lord, going before his face, making ready a people prepared for him (Lk. 1:16-17). Zecharias himself prophesied that John would be called "the prophet of the Most High" who would "go before the face of the Lord to make ready his ways" (Lk. 1:76). And an inspired writer asserts that John came from God in order to "bear witness of the light," i.e., Christ (Jn. 1:7-8). The fact that the birth of Christianity was such a resounding phenomenon, impacting the ancient world tremendously, and echoing marvelously across the centuries, is, in some measure, a commentary on how well John accomplished his mission. John's Message In a consideration of the preaching of John the Immerser, at least three areas should be given attention: (a) John's message concerning Jesus; (b) his emphasis upon the coming kingdom, and the demands of citizenship therein; and, © the warning of ultimate judgment. Let us briefly explore these matters. "Behold, the Lamb of God." John provided excellent witness to the nature of Christ. As the prophet began to generate attention, certain Jews in Jerusalem dispatched to him a delegation of priests and Levites in order to ascertain his identity. John emphatically stated that he was not the promised Messiah, nor was he a literally reincarnated Elijah; rather, he was the fulfillment of Isaiah's prophecy, the voice of preparation for the arrival of God in the flesh (Jn. 1:19-23). The declaration of John that he was unworthy to either carry Jesus' sandals or to unloose the thongs thereof (Mt. 3:11; Jn. 1:27) was stunning testimony indeed - with obvious implications. John characterized the Lord as "the lamb of God that takes away the sin of the world" (Jn. 1:29). In these remarks, the Immerser: (a) identifies Christ as the antitype of the Passover sacrifice; (b) asserts the vicarious nature of Jesus' impending death; © affirms the universality of the Savior's mission. Moreover, though John was chronologically older than Jesus, he declared that Christ "was before" him (Jn. 1:15,30). The imperfect tense form stresses the eternality of the preincarnate Word (Jn. 1:1), hence, the Lord's divine essence (see Morris, 108-109). Since John was administering a baptism that was "for the forgiveness of sins" (Mk. 1:4), he was understandably hesitant to immerse Jesus when the Lord approached him with that request (Mt. 3:14). The inference is clear; Jesus was sinless, or to say it in another way, a lamb without spot or blemish (1 Pet. 1:19). By implication, therefore, John acknowledged the perfection of Christ. Too, having heard the very voice of God himself, and having witnessed the descent of the Holy Spirit in the visible form of a dove at that baptismal scene, John faithfully bore witness that Jesus "is the Son of God" (Jn. 1:34). Many have been puzzled by John's statement that he "knew not" Jesus until the day he immersed the Lord in the Jordan (Jn. 1:31,33). It has been suggested that these texts indicate either that John did not know Jesus at all, or that he did not know the Lord as "Messiah," until the moment the Holy Spirit descended upon him when he came up from the water of baptism. I do not think either of these views is correct. Surely John must have known his mission relative to his kinsman since the earliest days of their lives. Moreover, the fact that he resisted immersing Jesus is a strong clue that he was aware of the uniqueness of the Savior. The key, I think, is in the Greek expression "knew [edein] not." The verb signifies a "clear and purely mental perception, in contrast both to conjecture and to knowledge derived from others" (Thayer, 118). When the Spirit was manifested at this time, John "knew," in a definitive way, not experienced heretofore, that Jesus was the Messiah. There was now a certainty, documented from a higher Source! "Repent, for the kingdom of Heaven is at hand." John preached about the coming kingdom and the need to repent. The Palestine in which the prophet's ministry was launched was firmly in the grip of a grossly pagan force, the Roman empire. Edersheim graphically describes the conditions of the time. "It has been rightly said, that the idea of conscience, as we understand it, was unknown to heathenism. Absolute right did not exist. Might was right. The social relations exhibited, if possible, even deeper corruption. The sanctity of marriage had ceased. Female dissipation and the general dissoluteness led at last to an almost entire cessation of marriage. Abortion, and the exposure and murder of newly-born children, were common and tolerated; unnatural vices, which even the greatest philosophers practiced, if not advocated, attained proportions which defy description" (I.259). Moral corruption had made deep inroads into Judaism as well. Read carefully the second chapter of the book of Romans. It was into this world that John came with his piercing message: "Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand" (Mt. 3:2; cf. Mk. 1:4). John's message of "repentance" entailed a deep consciousness of offense to God within the sinner's heart, with a required reformation of life. When he saw superficial Hebrews submitting to his immersion, void of any radical change of conduct, he rebuked them: "You offspring of vipers, who warned you to flee from the wrath to come? Bring forth, therefore, fruit worthy of repentance" (Mt. 3:7-8). "Fruit" is the outward expression of deep inner conviction. Without fruit there is no real repentance. Surely we can learn from this that repentance is much more than merely saying, "I'm sorry." Associated with John's demand for repentance, was an immersion in water. This will be discussed as a separate item below. For the preceding fifteen centuries - since the inauguration of the Mosaic system - the "reign" of God had been focused in the Hebrew people. This was by divine design - in preparation for the arrival of Heaven's Messiah (cf. Gal. 3:24-25). Now, though, a new phase of the "kingdom of God," i.e., his reign among men, was about to commence (cf. Mt. 21:43). It would be a regime of a different composition than that of the old theocracy (a combined religious and political system). The kingdom of Christ was not to be a this-world oriented system (see Jn. 18:36). When John proclaimed that the kingdom was "at hand," what did he mean by the expression. The Greek term is engus. The word basically means "near," when employed literally. It can be used figuratively in prophecy to denote the certainty of an event, from the perspective of time as God views things (cf. Dt. 32:35; Zeph. 1:7; see Jackson, 1995, 118-122). The subsequent context of the Gospel records reveals that literal proximity is indicated here. Jesus would later indicate that some of those in his audience would not die until they observed the kingdom arrive, accompanied by power (Mk. 9:1). Eventually it becomes apparent that this was fulfilled on the day of Pentecost (cf. Acts 1:8; 2:4). John certainly knew nothing of the modern idea that the "kingdom" was postponed until the time of Jesus' return to earth, as dispensational premillennialists now allege. "His fan is in his hand." John proclaimed coming judgment. As mentioned earlier, the Old Testament closed with a prophecy concerning the coming of him who would be in the spirit and power of Elijah, namely John (Mal. 4:5-6; Lk. 1:17). In connection therewith, Malachi spoke of the "coming of the great and dreadful day of Jehovah," and the smiting of the earth "with a curse." John's message had a biting edge. He spoke of divine retribution, "the wrath to come" (Mt. 3:7). There are several figures of speech employed by the prophet to provide thrust to his message. He talked about the "ax" that lies at the root of the trees, he spoke of an "unquenchable fire," and of a "fan" in the Lord's hand (Mt. 3:10-12). There likely is a two-fold thrust to the prophet's message. First, the more immediate application probably was to the impending destruction of the Jewish nation. Note that from John's perspective, "even now [literally, "already"] the ax lies at the root of the trees" (3:10). As Hendriksen observed, "Jerusalem's fall (A.D. 70) was perilously near, and foreshadowed the final judgment" (206). Secondly, the "fan" was the winnowing shovel with which the harvested grain was tossed into the wind so as to separate the kernel from the chaff. It thus signified the great separation between the righteous and the wicked in the ultimate ordering of God. Finally, there was the "unquenchable fire," which vividly pictured the eternal pain that will accompany the suffering of hell. [Note: For a discussion of the expression "he shall baptize you . . . in fire" (3:11), see "What Is The Baptism Of Fire?" The Baptism Administered by John It is imperative in this study that attention be given to the baptism administered by John. Here are some points for consideration: What was its "mode"? What elements accompanied it? What was the purpose of the ordinance? What was the consequence of rejecting John's baptism? Did those baptized by John have to be rebaptized after the church was established on Pentecost? What was its "mode"? The Greek term bapto is found four times in the New Testament and it always is rendered "dip" in the common versions (Lk. 16:24; Jn. 13:26 (twice); Rev. 19:13). Baptizo is found some eighty times, and it is almost always anglicized, i.e., it has been fashioned into a hybrid word; it becomes an English term with only slight letter modification. Such hybridization obscures the meaning of the original word, but is maintained today for commercial reasons. Unquestionably, the Greek terms denote the action of dipping, immersing, or submerging an object. Beasley-Murray writes: "Despite assertions to the contrary, it seems that baptizo, both in Jewish and Christian contexts, normally meant 'immerse,' and that even when it became a technical term for baptism, the thought of immersion remains" (144). John baptized at Aenon because there was "much water" [many waters] there (Jn. 3:23). Such a reference would hardly have been necessary if baptism can be administered with but a few drops of water. Marcus Dods, a Presbyterian scholar, says of this location: "therefore even in summer baptism by immersion could be continued" (719). John immersed people "in [eis - into] the river Jordan" (Mk. 1:5). The preposition eis "represents the passage of the person of Jesus into the water as the act of baptism took place" (McGarvey, 266). Moreover, when the baptism of Jesus by John was concluded, the Lord came up "out of" [ek] the water (Mk. 1:10), which clearly implies that he walked into the water - an act that more nearly suggests immersion than sprinkling. What elements accompanied it? Several things were required of those submitting to John's immersion, in order for the rite to have validity. First, the candidate must possess a confidence in the Messianic message of the Old Testament and hence "believe on him that should come after him [John], that is on Jesus" (Acts 19:4). Second, the baptism was one "of repentance" (Mk. 1:4), i.e., characterized by repentance - motivated by a radical change in disposition. Too, it was a baptism "unto" [eis - towards] repentance (Mt. 3:11), i.e., resulting in a reformation of life. William Hendriksen rendered the phrase in Matthew 3:11 as "with a view to conversion" (207). The preposition eis has its usual prospective thrust. Third, John's baptism involved a "confession" of sin (Mt. 3:6). Finally, the purpose of the prophet's immersion rite was "for the forgiveness of sins" (Mk. 1:4). When these requisites were satisfied, the individual received pardon, hence, was a part of that people "prepared" for the Lord (Lk. 1:17). He was "ready" to be set in the Savior's kingdom when such was formally launched on Pentecost. [Note: The theory, suggested by some, that John borrowed his baptism from the Jewish sect known as the Essenes is refuted by Jesus' question to the Jewish leaders: "The baptism of John, whence was it? From heaven or from men?" (Mt. 21:25). The Lord clearly implied that it was from God, not from the Qumran cult.] What was the purpose of the ordinance? Though some allege that the phrase "for the forgiveness of sins" (Mk. 1:4; cf. Acts 2:38) does not mean "in order to obtain the forgiveness of sins," the evidence suggesting otherwise is overwhelming. The standard Greek authorities contend that eis (rendered "for" KJV; "unto" ASV) looks forward to a goal to be achieved. Thayer suggests it means "to obtain" forgiveness (94). Eis expresses the "purpose" of the baptism, "in order to," "so that sins might be forgiven" (Arndt, 131, 228). What was the consequence of rejecting John's baptism? Luke's record reveals the dire consequences of rejecting John's baptism. "And all the people when they heard, and the publicans, justified God, being baptized with the baptism of John. But the Pharisees and the lawyers rejected for themselves the counsel of God, being not baptized of him" (7:29-30). Two words in this text are key. Submitting to John's baptism was described as "justifying" God, i.e., "by receiving the baptism [they] declared that it had been prescribed by God rightly" (Thayer, 150). A rejection of the baptism, the

WHO WAS JOHN THE BAPTIST?

Who Was John the Baptist? It was to be "John" (Lk. 1:13), which derives from a Hebrew term signifying "Jehovah is gracious." The Jewish historian Josephus even refers to John by this designation (Antiquities 18.5.2). "Among them that are born of women there has not arisen a greater than John the Baptist . . ." (Mt. 11:11).