More on John the Baptist

Some historical background on John the Baptist and the movement that arose in his name. This is an addendum to the previous blog (below) on Elijah and should be read in conjunction with that.

The most difficult statement any human being could make is, "He must become greater; I must become less" (3:30). Such a statement cuts against the grain of human experience. Yet the Baptist seems to say similar things routinely in the Fourth Gospel (cf. 1:27, 30). You won't find such statements in Matthew, Mark, and Luke, where the Baptist is a great and heroic figure. Why is the Baptist's humility such an emphasis in the Fourth Gospel? A brief survey of Scripture and history proves interesting.

In Matthew, Mark, and Luke the Baptist is described as a "Voice crying in the wilderness" (Isa 40:3, cf. Matt 3:3; Mark 1:3; Luke 3:4), the Elijah of the End time (Mal 4:5, cf. Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13; Luke 1:17; 9:19), and the Messenger who is to go before the Lord (Mal 3:1, cf. Matt 11:10; Mark 1:2; Luke 7:27). In the Fourth Gospel, on the other hand, the Baptist specifically denies that he is the Elijah and describes himself only as "the Voice" (1:21-23). The Fourth Gospel, therefore, minimizes titles for John and multiplies titles for Jesus (1:1, 8, 18, 29, 38, 41, 49, 51, etc.). John describes himself in the humblest of terms. "I am not worthy to untie the thong of his sandals" (1:27), "He must become greater; I must become less" (3:30).

Modern readers of the Gospel could get the impression that the Baptist appeared out of nowhere, baptized Jesus and then faded into the woodwork, never to be seen or heard from again. Historically, however, the Baptist and the movement of those who followed him seem to have been quite independent of Jesus. Only a few of the Baptist's disciples actually left him and followed Jesus, at least initially (1:35-51 cf. Matt 11:2, 3). The Baptist continued to minister and draw crowds for some time after the baptism of Jesus (3:22-30). In the book of Acts, the personal history of Apollos in Alexandria (Acts 18:24-26) and the story of the twelve men of Ephesus (Acts 19:1-7) both suggest the continuing independence of the Baptist movement. Even today, the Mandaeans, located primarily in Southern Iraq, are a small group of people who trace their religious heritage back to the ministry of John the Baptist more than to Jesus or Mohammed.

Many of those attracted to the Baptist in the wilderness, therefore, never gave their allegiance to Jesus but continued to follow the Baptist. At some point, probably after the writing of Matthew, Mark and Luke, but before the writing of the Fourth Gospel, the Baptist movement seems to have become increasingly hostile to Christianity. Since the Baptist himself was martyred because of political involvement, the movement may have found common cause with the zealots and other revolutionaries during the war with Rome (67-70 AD).

Knowing the gospel story as we do, it seems incredible that any follower of the Baptist would have failed to grasp the superiority of Jesus. But there are historical and theological reasons why many may have done so. First of all, there was the perception, not uncommon today as well, that when it comes to theology, earlier is usually better (Jesus appeals to this principle in Matt 19:3-9, for example). The "old paths" are to be preferred. Since the Baptist arrived before Jesus did, many Jews would have assumed that the Baptist was greater than Jesus.

A further reason why many might have regarded the Baptist as greater than Jesus was that the Jewish tradition of the time contained the belief that there would be not one, but two messiahs in the last days, a Messiah from the tribe of Judah, and a Messiah from the tribe of Levi (Russell, 304-323). The Messiah from out of Judah was to be a kingly Messiah, while the Messiah from the tribe of Levi was a priestly Messiah. In the Old Testament both kings and priests were anointed (Lev 8:1-13; 1 Sam 10:1; 16:1-13; 1 Kings 1:28-40, etc.)! Therefore, the expectation grew in some circles that the Messiah (Hebrew— "anointed one") could not be summed up in one person but would require at least two. When John the Baptist (of the tribe of Levi) and Jesus (of the tribe of Judah) appeared together, it is not surprising that people would assume that these traditions had found fulfillment in the relationship between John and Jesus.

Contrary to the modern ascendancy of politics over religion, the authors of the Dead Sea Scrolls considered the priest to be greater than the king. After all the High Priest Aaron took office hundreds of years before the first king ever ruled over Israel. Earlier is better! Not only so, but it was priests who anointed kings, and not the other way around! Ancient Israel was a theocracy ("ruled by God") and God was to be found in the temple, not in the king's palace.

What kind of arguments could first-century Christians bring to bear against the Baptist theology? For one thing, they would point out that Jesus fulfills the role of both king (Matthew, Mark and Luke—"the kingdom of God") and priest (Hebrews) in one person. The Old Testament forerunner of such a king-priest was Melchizedek (Gen 14:18-20; Psalm 110, cf. Matt 22:41-45 and parallels in Mark and Luke; Acts 2:29-36; Heb 1:13; 5:6, 10; 6:20; 7:1-28 etc.), and to some extent, perhaps, also Moses, who exercised both priestly and kingly functions (Exod 24:3-8; 32:1-14, 31, 32; Deut 1:6-3:29; 1 Cor 10:2; Heb 3:2-5). Christians would also argue that earlier revelation is not necessarily better, the present revelation in Christ is actually superior to the old revelation (John 1:17, cf. Heb 1:1-3).

But author of the Fourth Gospel does not approach the issue from these perspectives in 1:19-51. In this Gospel, instead, the concern is to explain why the Baptist came on the scene before Jesus did. The Baptist arrived before Jesus not because he was greater than Jesus (6-8!) but because it was his job to introduce Jesus to the nation (29-34). This could only happen if he came to prominence first. Earlier is not necessarily better. The Baptist was the forerunner, not the real thing. In his heavenly role, Jesus pre-existed the Baptist (1, 15, 30). The message of John is that those who rank the Baptist greater than Jesus disbelieve the testimony of the Baptist himself.


What did you think of this article?

  • No trackbacks exist for this post.
Page: 1 of 1
  • 5/19/2012 3:53 PM Dave Atkins wrote:
    Hello Dr Jon, I have read most of your books on Revelation and have enjoyed them greatly. I have run into the 2520 through a friend and I was totally unaware of this teaching by some church members. Do you have any knowledge of the 2520 and any opinion on it? I would appreciate any insight you have on this subject.
    Thank you.
    Reply to this
    1. 7/22/2012 4:43 PM Jon Paulien wrote:
      Early Adventist pioneers applied the year-day principle to the "seven times" of Nebuchanezzar in Daniel 4. They worked back from 1843 AD to 677 BC. I don't know of anyone who follows that analysis today.
      Reply to this
  • 7/7/2012 2:55 AM Bruce Prince wrote:
    Your title, "More on John the Baptist" caught my attention because this prophet of old is one of my Bible heroes. The title also leads me to assume there are earlier posts, but a search for "john the baptist" revealed nothing; pity. But then, being a newcomer to your site, perhaps I'm not looking in the right place?

    One of the aspects about John the Baptist is the tendency in the SDA church in particular, to promulgate the teaching that the faith of this great man of God faltered somewhat during his imprisonment.

    Apart from the fact that Scripture does not state that John's faith faltered, this is not the picture that Jesus paints for us, and for these reasons, I don't believe what our church teaches on this subject.

    Consider what Scripture tells us about John the Baptist:

    1. John recognised from the start that he must decrease whilst Jesus must decrease (Jn 3.30);
    2. It was God's will that John would be miraculously created and named "John", rather than the expected family name (Lk 1.7,13) for the purpose of initiating a revival (lk 1.16) and being a forerunner for Jesus (Lk 1.17);
    3. John's life would be a fulfilment of prophecy (Matt 11.10; Lk 7.27);
    4. When John's world was looking for the arrival of the Messiah, John is the only recorded person who recognised his appearance when others didn't have a clue (Jn 1.29, 34, 36);
    5. So strong was John's faith and conviction in Jesus as the Promised One, he devoted his entire life to being a forerunner and introducing Jesus to the world (Matt 3.1-12; Mk 1.1-8; Lk 3.1-17; Jn 1.19-34; 3.23-36);
    6. John was a humble man, destined by God for a purpose. This is evidenced by:
    (a) what he said about himself (Matt 3.11; Mk 1.7; Lk 3.16; Jn 1.19-23, 27, 30);
    (b) his reaction (or lack of) when some of his disciples left him to follow Jesus (Jn 1.35-37);
    (c) what he taught his disciples (Jn 3.25-36);
    (d) what Jesus said about John:
    (i) John was more than a prophet (Matt 11.9; Lk 7.26);
    (ii) John's existence was prophesied by Malachi (Matt 11.10; Lk 7.27);
    (iii) John's life was pure and undefiled (Matt 11.18; k 7.33);
    7. In Jesus' opinion, in the 4,000 years of human history that had preceded their day, no man born of woman was greater than John (Matt 11.11; Lk 7.28).

    Like Jesus, John had disciples whose faith was not as strong as it might be, and as Jon's previous post implies, there developed a "them and us" mentality between the disciples of John and those of Jesus. When John's disciples learned that the populous were becoming increasingly attracted to what Jesus was teaching, they complained to John (Jn 3.26; 4.1), who was now in Herod's prison. John had to explain to them that this was the way it had to be (Jn 3.27-36).

    When John sent his disciples to see and hear what Jesus was doing, and to report back to him, it wasn't for John's benefit; it was for their benefit. Jesus knew why they had come, and he sent them back to John with a report. After they left, Jesus t
    Reply to this
    1. 7/22/2012 4:52 PM Jon Paulien wrote:
      The "More" was a reference back to the previous blog entitled "Elijah.
      Scripture doesn't directly state that John's faith faltered, but his question as rendered by his disciples to Jesus suggests he had doubts about whether Jesus was truly the Messiah after all (Matt 11:2-3; Luke 7:19). Ellen White expands on this and is probably the primary source for most Adventists teach on the subject. You make a good point that the biblical question could well have been flavored by the disciples who brought it to Jesus. Your comments on the greatest of John the Baptist are certainly well taken.

      Reply to this

Page: 1 of 1
Leave a comment

Submitted comments are subject to moderation before being displayed.

 Name (required)

 Email (will not be published) (required)

Your comment is 0 characters limited to 3000 characters.