lilllll

111

mi II hi
Ii ill1

1111 II!

i

1 1 ii i

ii;ii

•irajLE-,WKra¥EKainnr- • iLHiaisAiKy •

DIVINITY SCHOOL
TROWBRIDGE LIBRARY

BOOKS BY A. T. ROBERTSON, D.D.
Published by CHARLES SCRUBNER'S SONS

Epochs in the Life of Jesus. 12mo, . net, $1.00
Epochs in the Life of Paul. 12mo, . net, S1.25
John the Loyal. 12mo  net, S1.25

JOHN THE LOYAL

JOHN THE LOYAL

STUDIES IN THE MINISTRY
OF THE BAPTIST

BY
A. T. ROBERTSON, M.A., D.D.
PROFESSOR OF NEW TESTAMENT INTERPRETATION, SOUTHERN BAPTIST THEO
LOGICAL SEMINARY, LOUISVILLE, KI.; AUTHOR OF " EPOCHS IN THE
LIFE OF JESUS," "EPOCHS IN THE LIFE OF PAUL." "SHORT
GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT," ETC.

0 Si ipCXos TOU VVfUptOV, 6 eOTI/KUS
nal anoiiov airov — John 3 : 29

rTrowfin(tg:e Reference L/Srsry )

Zh

&TY sc^£

CHARLES SCRIBNER'S SONS
NEWYORK :::::: 1911

FTto

CopwfoW, 1911
Bt Charles Scribneb's Sons
Published February, 19n

TO
THE HONORED MEMORY OF
WILLIAM HETH WHITSITT
SEEKER AFTER TRUTH

PREFACE
The literature on the ministry of the Baptist is not
large, as the Bibliography at the close of this volume
shows. Our most ambitious treatise is still that of
Reynolds, "John the Baptist," which was the Con
gregational Union Lecture for 1874. He lamented
then the paucity of books on this great theme. To
be sure, all the great lives of Jesus give considerable
attention to the work of the Forerunner of the Messiah,
and the recent Bible dictionaries have able articles
about him. It is proper that John should be over
shadowed by Jesus. It was what he himself wished
and what he foresaw. But, just as Paul is a beacon-
light in the Apostolic Age, so the Baptist stands on
the other side (and partly parallel with the life) of
Jesus. One furnishes the true prospective view, the
other the just retrospective interpretation. Jesus
towers in the middle, far above both of them, but
both John and Paul must receive adequate treatment.
Paul has fared better than John, partly because of
the wealth of original material from him and about
him, partly also because of the fuller light that blazed
around him. John was like the morning star in the
vii

viii PREFACE
early dawn, a very bright and shining one indeed.
John wrote nothing himself, though probably " Logia
of John" were preserved in Aramaic which were
used in the fragments of his preaching preserved in
Matthew and Luke.
I have written the present book because of the
fascination which John has for me. I have attempted
a positive interpretation of the life and work of the
Baptist for the general reader, in the light of the new
knowledge of his time. This is an age in which
everything is challenged, even the very existence of
Jesus. But merely technical points are put in the
foot-notes so as not to disturb the reader who does not
care for them. Other questions of a more erudite
nature are also reserved for the notes. The book is
not meant as an apologetic, and I do not feel called
upon to justify every statement in the Gospels for the
benefit of the modern disbeliever. I have treated
such questions as occasion arose, not from a sense of
compulsion. It is John himself that I wish to bring
before the reader, if I may, with something of his
powerful personality. Vitality throbs in his words to
day as when he first spoke them to the multitude^.
I have called him " John the Loyal " from no sensa
tional motive, but as an aid to just understanding of
the man. The term "the Baptist," so indissolubly
and justly linked with his name, has one peril. It

PREFACE ix
puts accent on the new ordinance which attracted so
much attention then. But John was not a ceremoni-
alist. The spiritual element was the main thing in
his nature. He "followed the gleam" and was loyal
to his vision. That is the dominant note in his life.
The material for a study of John is not very ex
tensive (the gospel fragments, a little in Acts, a par
agraph in Josephus), but it is remarkably rich in
suggestion. His figure stands out with marvellous
clearness when the various items are brought together
and rightly interpreted. He was one of the great
spirits of human history, and deserves our best efforts
to understand him. He is still the Voice crying in
the Wilderness, and the people are ever eager to hear
his words.
A. T. Robertson.
Louisville, Kt.
February 1, 1911.

I am indebted for the excellent indices to three of
my students, Rev. Powhatan James, W. J. Nelson, and
J. B. Weatherspoon.
A. T. R.

TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER pA0„
I. Equipment  1
II. Challenge  36
III. Remedy  69
IV. Vision  95
V. Reality  Ill
VI. Temptation  129
VII. Joy  160
VIII. Peril  180
IX. Gloom  195
X. Appreciation  223
XI. Martyrdom  254
XII. Lingering Echoes  270
Bibliography  307
General Index  309
Scripture Index ... ,  311

JOHN THE LOYAL

CHAPTER I
EQUIPMENT
"For he shall be great in the sight of the Lord, and he
shall drink no wine nor strong drink; and he shall be
filled with the Holy Ghost, even from his mother's
womb" (Luke 1 : 15).
1. The Hand of God. — This is the point with which
to begin the study of John's life, as it is indeed with
that of all men in one sense. The presence of God in
history is the great lesson that the serious student of
history learns. Nothing but God's hand in the his
tory of the race can explain the great movements
upward and onward. But the narrative1 which tells
us all that we know of the birth of John draws a far
more intimate picture of this child's relation to God
or, rather, of God's interest in him. "The hand of
the Lord was with him" 2 as a child. One loves to
think that heaven is near the life of every child.
1 Holtzmann ("The Life of Jesus," p. 108) bluntly says: "The story
of John's birth (Luke 1 : 5-25, 57-80) is a legend of late Christian times,
which John 1: 31-34 contradicts." For the life of me I fail to see what
there is in these verses in Luke which contradicts the statement in John
that the Baptist had not known Jesus till the baptism of Christ. It is
expressly stated in Luke that Mary left Elizabeth about the time of the
birth of John. The acquaintance between Elizabeth and Mary (Luke
1 : 36-56) does not prove acquaintance between John and Jesus (John
1: 31 ff.). As to the " legend " notion of Holtzmann, anything is "legend"
with him that bears the mark of the supernatural.
2 Luke 1:66. 1

2 JOHN THE LOYAL
But we are at once ushered into an atmosphere of
the most intimate communion with God. The cur
tain is lifted and the hand of God is seen reaching
out before this child is born. Time was when the
mere mention of the possibility of God's making his
will known by angel or other miracle was the occasion
of supercilious scorn in many educated circles. But
we have lived to see the day when religious experience
is considered a subject worthy of scientific investiga
tion and belief.1 Besides, when cold scientists like
the late William James and Sir Oliver Lodge believe
in the possibility (even actuality) of communication
with the dead, one is surely not called upon to assume
an apologetic air if he avows his belief in the power of
God to manifest himself to men.2
2. The Value of the Record. — The testimony of
Luke is sometimes discredited on the score that he
alone records the account of the Baptist's nativity.
But Luke is not now without able champions among
modern scholars.3 "That Luke is ever at variance
with other historians has still to be proved; and the
merit of greater accuracy may still be with him, even
if such variance exists."4 It is worth noting also
that the story of the Baptist's miraculous birth comes
immediately after the classic introduction5 in which he
1 Cf . William James, " Varieties of Religious Experience."
8 This argument does not, of course, prove that God sent his angel
Gabriel to Zacharias. It leaves the question to be examined on its
merits. 8 Cf. Ramsay, " Was Christ Born at Bethlehem? ", " Luke the Physician,"
"St. Paul the Traveller"; Chase, "The Credibility of Acts"; and even
Harnack (on most points), "Luke the Physician," "The Acts of the
Apostles." » Plummer, " Commentary on Luke," p. 6.
•1: 1-4.

EQUIPMENT 3
has stated his painstaking thoroughness in the exami
nation and use of his sources of information. It is be
yond controversy, therefore, that Luke had what he
considered reliable testimony for what he here relates
in so vivid and captivating a manner. Whether it
was an Aramaic document or whether he learned this
beautiful Bit of biography from Mary, the Mother of
Jesus (or from one of her circle), during his two years'
sojourn with Paul at Csesarea,1 may never be known.
But the whole tone of Luke's narrative lifts it far
above the late apocryphal stories which have come
down to us.2 " In any case, we have here the earliest
documentary evidence respecting the origins of Chris
tianity which has come down to us — evidence which
may justly be called contemporary.3 It may be
added that the drift of modern criticism has been
distinctly toward a comparatively early date for the
Gospel of Luke (from A. D. 58-80), so that the old
notion of a late invention of the miraculous birth of
John as being necessary for one who was to be the
Forerunner of the Messiah falls to the ground.4 Be
sides, the whole spirit of the narrative here is pre-
Christian, an impossibility for a late inventor. Then
again, the very language of this narrative (like that
of ch. 2) is quite Hebraistic (Aramaic), while Luke's
1 Acts 23-26.
8 " To appreciate the historical sobriety and manifestly primary char
acter of this early Jewish-Christian source, we have only to compare the
first chapter of Luke with the relative sections of the ' Protevangelium
Jacobi,' and especially with those chapters (22-24) which Harnack calls
the Apocryphum Zacharice." Lambert, in " Hastings's D. C. G."
» Plummer, "Commentary on Luke," p. 7. •
4 Marcion does omit this section from his mutilated edition of Luke,
but he did so upon doctrinal, not upon critical, grounds. Cf. Plummer,
"Luke," p. 6.

4 JOHN THE LOYAL
introduction is the most classic bit of construction
(literary form) in the New Testament. Luke is here
"a faithful collector of evangelic memorabilia" which
he "allows to speak for itself."1 His keen sense of
historical values is probably the very reason for the
preservation of this most important detail which
escaped the notice of Mark and Matthew.
But the narrative is attacked on its inherent char
acter, irrespective of its early date or documentary
nature. "Some have found in this a fabulous ele
ment, modelled upon the history of such men of God
of Old Testament times as Isaac, Samson, and
Samuel." 2 This objection assumes that these Old
Testament stories are without value because of the
birth of children under unusual conditions.3 It is
true that there -is the point of similarity in the birth of
a son to aged parents, but, unless God is to be ruled
out of human life, the narrative is not to be discounted
on that score. Indeed, Luke seems here to be re
porting events out of harmony with popular expecta
tion which is naively introduced in a way that guar
antees the historical character of the narrative. The
people were amazed at Elizabeth for naming the child
John, and the traditions in the Hill Country confirm
his account.4
Criticism has its place in the study of the ministry
of the Baptist. The fragmentary accounts must be
1 Bruce, "Expositor's Greek Text," in loco.
! Weiss, "The Life of Christ," vol. I, p. 234.
* " This calamity [barrenness] is grievous to all Orientals, and specially
grievous to Jews, each of whom is ambitious of being among the pro
genitors of the Messiah" (Plummer, p. 10).
i Weiss, "Life of Christ," vol. I, p. 235.

EQUIPMENT 5
combined, sifted and co-ordinated.1 "By the ordi
nary, uncritical reading of the New Testament
Scriptures, one gets a very imperfect and one-sided
view of John the Baptist." 2 It may be retorted that
the uncritical have no monopoly in the matter of one
sided views of the Baptist, for assuredly the critics do
not agree in their interpretation of him. But Mr.
Bradley lays the blame for this state of affairs on the
New Testament writers, to whom John "is a person
of secondary importance." " Under the circumstances
the strange thing is that they should have preserved at
all some of the facts which they furnish regarding
John." His point is that the gospels exalt Jesus at
the expense of John, that John was not the Fore
runner of Jesus as " the gospel writers grew more and
more to view him." Incidentally, this criticism of
Bradley answers those who claim that Luke has over
praised the Baptist in the birth narrative, but un
fortunately Mr. Bradley has to pursue processes en
tirely too subjective to be convincing. The narrative
of Luke " is full of poetry, no doubt, but it is the kind
of poetry which bursts like a flower from the living
stem of actual truth." 3 In a word, then, it may be
said at once that minute study of the New Testament
1 It is true that in a general way the material from the Synoptic Gospels
goes together (Matt. 3 : 1-12; 4 : 12; 9 : 14; 11 : 2-19; 14 : 3-12; 17 : 12 f.;
21 : 23-27, 32; Mark 1 : 2-8, 14; 2 : 18; 6 : 17-29; 9 : 13; 11 : 27-33; Luke
1:5-25, 36-45, 57-80; 3:1-20; 5:33; 7:18-35; 9:9; 11:1; 16:16;
20:1-8), while that of the Acts (1:5, 22: 10:37; 11 : 16; 13:24f.; 18:25;
19 : 3 ff.), of John (1 : 6-8, 15, 19-40; 3 : 22-36; 4 : 1; 5 : 33-36; 10 : 40-42)
and of Josephus (" Ant.," xviii, 5, 2) is distinct. But the various threads
can be picked up and pieced into a whole.
2W. P. Bradley, "John the Baptist as Forerunner," The Biblical
World, May, 1910, p. 327.
> Lambert, " Hastings's D. C. G."

6 JOHN THE LOYAL
picture of John gives the result of a coherent whole,
a primitive figure, whose rugged outlines left so deep
a mark upon his time that even the greatest Figure of
all time has not effaced that impress, even when he
crept close beside the Son of God and stood in his
light.
3. The Home to Which He Was to Come. — It is a
great thing for any home when a child enters it. He
comes as a prince, a fresh gift from God. No child
had come to the home of Zacharias and Elizabeth.
They had borne their burden with silent sorrow, but
with chastened spirits. They were far advanced in
their days, as Luke expresses it in the Old Testa
ment phrase.1 Step by step they had together gone,
though the patter of no child's feet was heard by their
side. Hand in hand also2 they had journeyed s
(were still journeying) " in all the commandments and
ordinances of the Lord." They had kept in the path
all the way, God's path, and so were righteous4 in
the sight of God.5 They had walked uprightly with
God, and were blameless6 in the sight of men. They
had grown rich in grace, and ripe in piety for the
journey's end. Of all the homes in the Hill Country
there seemed not one where a child would have fared
better or been more welcome. It was a priestly fam
ily on both sides. Elizabeth was a daughter (de
scendant) of Aaron, and Zacharias was still officiat-
1 aptporepot irpo/ScfiijKore? iv Tats ^juepat? avTUP riaav (1 : 7). Cf. Gen.
24 : 1; Josh. 13 : 1. The periphrastic past perfect looks back over the
long years before this time.
2 ajtiJoTepoi (1 : 6). J iropevjfuroi.
* &Kaioi (from fit/oj, SeiKPUjUL, show the way). B ivavrlov iJeoG.
6 anejiTrroi. It can be referred to God's point of view also, but it is a
stronger word than SUaioi, which was used of God's view.

EQUIPMENT 7
ing as priest, as he had the right to do.1 There had
been twenty-four classes of priests since the days of
David, and the course of Abia was the eighth.2
Zacharias and Elizabeth are both in Jerusalem, for it
was the turn of Zacharias to serve his week in the
temple worship. But it was a great day in the life
of Zacharias, for it had come to him to offer incense
on one of these days.3 There were possibly twenty
thousand priests, and no priest was allowed to burn
incense in the Holy Place but once in his lifetime.
This honor many priests never received at all, but
now it had come to Zacharias in his old age. The
officiating priest was allowed to have two helpers, but
they retired and left him alone in the Holy Place.4
Luke gives another touch to the picture. The people
kept praying5 outside in the temple courts.6 Luke is
fond of noting prayer. Inside the Holy Place was
Zacharias, fulfilling the duties of his great hour,
knowing full well that it was a great hour, but little
understanding what God had in store for him. It is
usually at just such a time and in such a spirit that
God opens his treasures to us. The hour of climax
is in the path of duty.
4. The Child's Character Foretold. — Zacharias was
alone in the Holy Place. One moment he saw noth
ing unusual. The next there stood 7 an angel of the
Lord. He was face to face with the angel. Luke
1 Levites were superannuated at sixty, but not priests. Cf. Plummer,
in loco. 2 I Chron. 24 : 10.
8 lAaxe toS tfvp,iSo-ai. The lot was cast both morning and evening.
4 Plummer, in loco.
5 ?» irpo<reux^e«"»'- " ri 'eP">'> Du* n0* * vais-
i «rrue (standing).

8 JOHN THE LOYAL
says that the angel "appeared" to him.1 It is the
word that Paul uses of the appearance of Jesus to
him on the way to Damascus as well as to the other
disciples before.2 It is worth little to explain the
vision away as a mere subjective impression due to
overwrought nerves. Curiously enough Zacharias, as
we know, refused to accept the message of the angel,
and so can hardly be accused of having imagined
the vision. The theory of a mere optical illusion is
equally fanciful. The unseen world hovers nearer
to all of us than we usually understand.3 If one ad
mits the possibility of the miraculous and the normal
credibility of Luke, there is little ground for refusing
credence here, unless one considers the birth of the
Forerunner an event unworthy of such a special mani
festation of divine power. One need not discuss the
psychological possibilities of the case4 save to agree
with Plummer5 that "the unique circumstances con
tributed to make him conscious of that unseen world
which is around all of us." Zacharias was instantly
thrown into violent agitation8 at the sight of the
angel at the right hand of the altar ("the place of
honor"7) facing him. "Fear fell upon him" like a
bolt of lightning. He was too much afraid to speak.
The angel broke the silence. "Quit being afraid,8
Zacharias," he said. That was reassuring and Zach-
1 <I>cp#i). Cf. Luke 22 : 43. Functiliar action. It all happened in a
moment. 2 1 Cor. 15 : 6 ff. » Cf. II Kings 6 : 17.
4 Cf . Lange, " Life of Christ," I, p. 264. 6 In loco.
a irapix&n- Effective aorist.
7 Plummer, in loco.
8 pti cpojSov. Mi) with the pres. imper. usually means to stop what one
is doing.

EQUIPMENT 9
arias would listen. The prayer1 of Zacharias has been
heard.2 He had apparently been praying for offspring3
in this great hour of opportunity, his one great
hour. Plummer4 doubts whether Zacharias would
make his private wishes the subject of prayer at such
a time, and whether he would have prayed for a son
at his age, or would have doubted the angel after
having prayed for a son. But one can cite the case
of the disciples who disbelieved the answer to their
prayer about the release of Peter.5 Besides, a prayer
for a child is in harmony with the Old Testament
atmosphere of this whole incident. At such a time
one is likely to give vent to the deepest longing of his
heart. Many a time he and Elizabeth had prayed
for a child, and now he had once more uttered what
might seem an impossible appeal even to God. Cer
tainly the birth of this son had a direct bearing on the
coming of the Kingdom for which the people con
stantly prayed. The angel proceeds. He even gives
a name to the son, the name John or Johanan.8 The
name was new to the family of Zacharias, but most
suitable to the circumstances. The first blessing will
come to Zacharias (and Elizabeth). There will be to
him " joy and exultation." 7 The second word means
extreme joy. He will be glad to have a son, and
gladder still to have such a son.8 But he will bring
1 ieijo-is, a special prayer for personal need (Se'o/xm) a8 opposed to irpoo-evxii,
general prayer.
2 eimiKoiabl. A difficult aorist to translate. The action is punctiliar
and is stated as past, but it is just past.
8 So Bruce, in loco. * In loco. ' Acts 12.
• 'Iwanjs. Cf. II Chron. 28 : 12, etc. It is an abbreviation of Jehohanan,
Jehovah's gift.
7 gapa troi xal ayaAAi<wi«. 8 Bruce, in loco.

10 * JOHN THE LOYAL
joy1 to many others also upon the occasion of 2 his
birth. The angel is looking to the future work of the
Forerunner. The love of the people for John will be
one of the notable things in New Testament times.3
He shall be great in the eye of the Lord. Great4 is
sometimes greater than the superlative (very great,
for instance). In this context "great" includes also
goodness, for it is in the eye of the Lord. The praise
of Jesus will accord with this high standard.5 The
vow of a Nazirite will be his, and for his whole life,
as was true of Samson and Samuel. This vow was
usually for a short while.6 All kinds of intoxicating
drinks are to be avoided.7 This ascetic life will har
monize with the wilderness, though Nazirites did not
necessarily dwell apart. It is to be noted that Jesus
was not a Nazirite, and Paul only on occasion. But
the most significant thing about John is the promise
that he will be filled with the Holy Spirit from his
birth. It is a promise of the revival of prophecy. It
had been some four hundred years since the voice
of prophecy ceased with Malachi. And now a real
prophet was to come again. Thus equipped he will
turn8 many of the sons of Israel to the Lord their
God. It was a day of backsliding. This prophecy
also came true. The quaintness and originality of
the phraseology make it difficult to think that this is
a mere composition of Luke put into the mouth of
1 jupynToi. A durative second future passive. 2 i*t.
8 " The Pharisees did not dare say that John was not a prophet (Matt.
21 : 26); and Herod, until driven to it, did not dare to put him to death
(Mark 14: 5)" (Plummer).
4 (ieyas in absolute sense.
6 Luke 7 : 28. • Acts 18 : 18. i olvov «ai aUipa.
8 i-nunptyei durative future, repetition with mAAoifc.

EQUIPMENT 11
the angel. He shall go before the Lord J in his office
as prophet. The word "him" could refer to the
Messiah only by supposing something else said by
the angel not here recorded. But, still, the idea
doubtless is that God "comes to his people in the
person of the Messiah" (Plummer). John's work
will be " in the spirit and power of Elijah." He will
not be Elijah himself, as some of the Jews expected
and as John denied.2 But he will be the real fulfil
ment of the return of Elijah as Jesus will himself
show.3 He will reproduce this great prophet's work,
though he will work no miracles. It will be like the
days of old. This second coming of Elijah will in
troduce the days of the Messiah. No wonder that he
will turn the hearts of the fathers to their children
when such a child as this has come. Parental affec
tion had sadly languished and the child had lost its
place with many.4 The word "turn" 5 is conversion,
the idea in John's word "repent." He will make
ready a prepared people6 for the Lord, yes, and for
his Messiah. It was a wonderful picture. Every
word was pregnant with meaning. And these words
came pouring into the ears and heart of Zacharias.
Could they be true? Were they not too marvellous
to be true?
5. The Scepticism of Zacharias. — The demand upon
Zacharias's faith was too great. He had not dared to
1 evioTTiov ovtov. Cf. Isa. 40 : 1-11; Mal. 3 : 1-5.
2 John 1 : 21.
» Matt. 17 : 12; Mark 9 : 12. The great prophets in the minds of the
Jews were Elijah, Jeremiah, Daniel.
4 Cf. Sirach xlviii; Isa. 63 : 16; Matt. 19 : 13.
6 eirt<rrpe>ai. It was the common word with the prophets.
6 Kabv napeaKevffafievov.

12 JOHN THE LOYAL
ask for such a child, perhaps had not felt worthy of
such a son. Indeed, if truth be told, he may not have
really believed that he would be given a child at all in
spite of his petition for one. It was a natural reac
tion, when the angel ceased his wondrous story, for
Zacharias to ask : " Whereby shall I know this ? " 1
He does not squarely deny the possibility of such an
event, though he sees at once the obvious difficulty of
such a hope in view of the old age of himself and
Elizabeth. Perhaps the angel had overlooked this
point. At any rate it will do no harm to ask for proof.2
Zacharias could excuse himself by the example of
Gideon and Hezekiah, who asked for signs,3 and by
that of Moses and Ahaz, who had signs without
asking.4 At such moments one's mind works rap
idly, but not always correctly. One naturally recoils
when his "day-dream is objectified." 5 The case of
Martha at the grave of Lazarus is in point.6 But,
after all, however specious and excusable, it was
doubt of the angel's word, of the message of God,
and doubt in spite of the miraculous presence of the
angel, itself proof enough if any was needed. The
beautiful faith of Mary stands out in sharp contrast
to the doubt of Zacharias.7 The angel feels called
upon to justify himself. He tells who he is.8 We
know the names of two angels in Scripture, Gabriel,9
i Luke 1 : 18.
2 Kara ri yvtotrofiai tqvto. His question asks for a sign by which to gauge
(«ara) the promise.
8 Judges 6 : 36-39; II Kings 20 : 8.
4 Ex. 4 : 2-6; Isa. 7 : 11. Cf. Plummer, p. 16.
8 Bruce, in loco. "John 11 : 27, 39 f. • Luke 1 : 38.
8 "Gabriel answers his *y<i ei^iwith another" (Plummer).
» Dan. 8 : 16; 10 : 21.

EQUIPMENT 13
"the Man of God," "the angel of mercy," and
Michael1 (who is like God?), "the angel of judg
ment," the opponent of Satan. Gabriel was appar-
endy chief of the angels sent on errands concerning
man's redemption.2 He stands in the presence of
God always ready.3 It was a high place to fill. He
had been sent4 to speak to Zacharias, and it was
good tidings5 that he had brought. It was a sharp
rejoinder. Zacharias had disbelieved an angel and a
special messenger to him. The proof that Zacharias
asked for will be given and in a form to leave no room
for doubt on his part. It will come in his very per
son and will be in the nature of a punishment for this
doubt. He had used his tongue to speak his doubt,
and now his tongue will be silent6 till the fulfilment
of the prophecy. It is put positively and negatively7
for emphasis. The angel does not leave Zacharias
to interpret the reason for this kind of proof. His
words will be fulfilled to the letter8 in due time.9
The dumbness began at once, and Zacharias was
not allowed a reply. Meanwhile considerable time
had been consumed. According to the Talmud the
'Dan. 10:13, 21: 12:1: Jude 9; Rev. 12:7. In the later Jewish
books other names are given and different ideas of these two occur. Cf.
Plummer. 2 Cf. Heb. 1 : 14, ajrotfreAAo/iei'a.
8 irape<7T7|i£w!. Note irapa by the side of.
} imtrriKiiv. Sent from God himself. Cf. Heb. 1 : 14.
8 eiayyelUirair&ai. The first use Of "gospel" 'evayyiKlov) in connection
with the mission of John or Jesus.
6 Kai tfiov tVft auairlov Kal fJ-r) 8ova.fi.eviK AaA^trat. The iSov solemnly Calls
attention to his penalty. 'Ea~n trmnCiv is durative future made plain by the
periphrastic form.
' Cf. Acts 13 : 11, «m tv0X6s m pkiirwv. Bruce, in loco, thinks the dumb
ness was " the almost natural effect of his state of mind — a kind of pro
longed stupefaction."
8 oiruft, not ol. ' naipiv, not ^po^os-

14 JOHN THE LOYAL
priests were expected to return soon to prevent
anxiety.1 The fear of harm to Zacharias was natural
in the Levitical religion, which viewed God as far
from man.2 The people were in a state of eager
expectancy3 and were already wondering4 at the con
tinued delay5 of Zacharias in the temple. He finally
came out, but he could not say a word, not even
pronounce the benediction, as was the custom.6 He
probably made signs so that they preceived7 that he
had seen8 a vision in the temple. It is not made clear
how they knew so well that he had seen a vision.
Besides his signs and the dumbness there was prob
ably a look of rapture on his face. Zacharias was
manifestly in a state of keen excitement, for he kept
on making signs (nods)9 and remained10 dumb. After
his week's service11 was over, Zacharias went back to
his home in the Hill Country of Judea.12 He went a
humbler, but a wiser man, full of thoughts of what he
had heard and felt. We do not know the location
of this home. Hebron has been claimed by some,13
others urge Juttah (also a priestly town),14 others still,
1 Plummer.
2 Bruce. Cf. WUnsche, "Beitrage," p. 413; Lev. 16: 13.
8 1)v jraoaSoKiov. A strong word (cf. Luke 3 : 15) and note periphrastic
form. 4 e&uiiuafox, descriptive imperfect (slightly inchoative).
6 Xpovi(eiv, durative present. 6 Num. 6 : 24-26.
7 eiriyvioo-av. Note eiri and see Acts 3 : 10; 4 : 13.
8 eiopaiKK, vivid historical present perfect retained in indirect discourse.
9 Jjv Siavevuv. Periphrastic imperfect again.
10 SUiuvtv. Both imperfect tense and Sii accent the durative idea.
11 AcirovpYi'a (Ae'ws equals A065, epyoi') was work for the people, public ser
vice. In Greece it was often public work rendered by a citizen at his own
expense. In Egypt, as the papyri show (Deissmann, " Bible Studies,"
pp. 140 f.), it was used in a ceremonial sense of the work of the priests
in the temples. Thus it came to the Septuagint and the New Testament
12 Luke 1 : 39. is Othon, " Lex. Rabbin.," 324.
14 Josh. 15: 55; 21: 16.

EQUIPMENT 15
A in Karin,1 or, yet again, Mar Zakarya.2 We only
know that at some town in the southern hills Zacharias
had his home.3
6. The Joy of Elizabeth. — It was a great day for
Elizabeth when she discovered that, old as she was,
she was indeed to be a mother. Zacharias had, of
course, written out for her the promise of the angel,
though Luke does not say so. The motive of Eliza
beth in so completely4 hiding herself 5 is not told,
nor can we clearly conjecture. It is possible that her
statements were at first met with ridicule by her
friends, or the solemn dignity of the event may have
called for seclusion, or, indeed, it may have been just
to avoid talk. But she had exultant joy. "Thus
hath the Lord done6 unto me in the days wherein he
looked upon7 me, to take away my reproach among
men." 8 She can now lift up her head. And yet
for a long time she hides her head. Her cup was so
full that she must be alone with God. This attitude
of exalted joy continues with Elizabeth. Much is
written these days about the science of eugenics, but
at least this is true. A child is entitled to a joyful
welcome by both mother and father. Much in the
i Didon, "Life of Christ," Appendix D.
2Cheyne ("Encycl. Bibl.") mentions this as the traditional place of
John's birth, but does not accept it.
8 Smith ("In the Days of His Flesh," p. 25) agrees with Caspari that it
was probably Khirbet-el-Jehud, near Ain Karin.
4 irepi. It is a voluntary silence with her, not enforced as with Zacha
rias. 6 wepiiupvpev iavrrjv. Reflexive expressed rather than the somewhat
rare direct middle. It is not certain whether irepiiicpvpev is a late second
aorist (constative) or a late imperfect (so durative).
« *em>ii)Kev. Present perfect to accent permanence of the blessing.
7 eirelSev aorist (so punctiliar) sums up God's mercy.
8 Luke 1 : 25.

16 JOHN THE LOYAL
child's life depends on the welcome in the home. It
was to be this child's privilege to enter an atmosphere
of deep religious fervor, of genuine spiritual life.
That fact will have its influence on his life, for he
will one day confront and condemn the mere formal
religiosity of the time.
7. Fellowship with Mary. — The same angel who
had brought the wonderful news to Zacharias re
vealed to Mary her exalted destiny. Mary asked for
no sign, but one was granted her, a gracious one
without a penalty.1 The sign was what had already
happened to her kinswoman,2 Elizabeth. Mary was
prompt to go and receive her proof from Elizabeth.
It was a hallowed meeting between these two chosen
women, the sacred privacy of which we must not
roughly disturb. But Luke mentions several details.
One is the fact that the babe responded to the saluta
tion of Mary with a leap.3 Another is the inspiration
of Elizabeth. Mary apparently had told Elizabeth
nothing of what Gabriel had told her. She inter
preted4 the babe's leaping to mean that the mother
of the Messiah stood before her,5 with all a mother's
sympathy and the high ecstasy of the Holy Spirit's
enlightenment. In reality, her outcry in so loud6 a
voice was a rhapsody of intense emotion. But it was
a sober and clear insight, though on so high a plane.
1 Plummer, in loco.
2<rvyyevis. Not necessarily "cousin" nor proof that Mary belonged
to the tribe of Levi rather than that of Judah. Levites could marry
with other tribes.
8 ia-Kiprria-ev. Cf. Gen. 25 : 22; Ps. 113 : 4, 6. Probably felt by Luke to
be the first instinctive greeting of the coming Messiah by the Forerunner.
4 Luke 1 : 43 f. 8 Bruce, in loco.
8 av€(ptovT}<rev Kpavyfj fxtydhfl. Cf. ActS 26 : 24.

EQUIPMENT 17
Elizabeth counted it a great honor to have received
this visit from " the mother of my Lord." 1 This
song of Elizabeth (with Hebrew parallelism) is the
first of the New Testament hymns. It is also the first
beatitude in the New Testament and a double one,
though different Greek words2 occur in verses 42
and 45, which are translated "blessed." The one
accents the idea of credit as blessed, the other (cf.
beatitudes of Jesus) the notion of inherent happiness.
Both were true of Mary. Elizabeth now knows the
story of Mary's happiness, whether by inspiration or
from Mary. She felicitates Mary on her faith,3 per
haps with memories of the doubt of Zacharias, and
on the certainty of fulfilment4 for her. The souls of
the two saintly women are now strung to a high note
of adoration and praise. Mary answers with her
wonderful " Magnificat," 5 which it is not my province
here to explain. On the return of Mary to Nazareth
the three months soon sped by. The birth of a son
to Elizabeth created a great stir among all the neigh
bors6 and kinsfolk.7 They acknowledged that God
had "magnified"8 Elizabeth (a "Magnificat" for her
also). They kept a season of rejoicing with her,9 the
1 Kvplov here not in sense of courtesy, but in the Old Testament sense
equals Lord Messiah (Ps. 110 : 1). She thus grasps the deity and humanity
of Jesus. Cf. Christ's use of this Psalm in Matt. 22 : 42 ff. The phrase
" Mother of God " is not in the New Testament. Cf . Plummer, in loco, vs.
Didon, "Vie de Jesus," p. 111.
1 eiXoynfLcini (perfect passive participle) and p.<ucapia Cf. Deut. 28 : 4;
Matt. 5 : 3 ff .
8 ii irurrciaaaa. Attributive participle expressing antecedent action.
4 TeAeuacrtf.
8 tUcyaX-avm. A few critics wrongly refer this song also to Elizabeth.
• n-epioucot equals dwellers around the house.
7 o-uyyzvtls, the usual word, not the late avyyevilts*
8 ifixyaXwev.
» <ruvi\a.ipov. Imperfect (so durative).

18 JOHN THE LOYAL
first fulfilment of Gabriel's prophecy about John.1 It
was more than mere congratulation. It is with sim
ple dignity and charm that Luke has thus portrayed
the birth of the Baptist.
8. The New Name in the Family. — The Jewish
law about circumcision2 was ceremoniously observed.3
The friends4 who had come for the ceremony wished
to name the child also as a part, in fact, of the cer
emony.5 To name him Zacharias was surely most
appropriate and common.6 So they began7 calling
the boy Zacharias, and thought that the ceremony
was over. But there was a sudden, interruption8
on the part of Elizabeth. Zacharias had probably
written on a tablet that the child's name was to be
John. But the friends would not surrender their
point without protest.9 They even appealed earnestly
by nods and signs10 to Zacharias to get his wish in
the hope that he would take their side in the matter
against Elizabeth. It is curious the keen zest that
people have in all that concerns a baby. It is pos
sible that Zacharias was deaf as well as dumb, as is
often the case,11 or they may have wished to spare the
feelings12 of Elizabeth by so doing. At any rate,
Zacharias understood the signs, if he had not already
overheard the conversation, and asked for a tablet.13
He asked, of course, by signs. He wrote : " John is
1 Cf. Luke 1:14. 2 Cf. Ex. 4 : 25. > Luke 1 : 59.
4 Note f/Mav plural. B Plummer, in loco.
6 Josephus, " Ant.," xiv, 1, 3.
7 eita\ovv. Inchoative-conative imperfect. Cf. Matt. 3 : 14.
8 ovx', ixM. 9 Luke I : 61.
"> ivevevov. Iterative imperfect. Cf. JJk juwetW (1 : 22).
11 ie™),.* (1 : 22) can mean this. a Meyer, in loco.
18 -irtvaidSiov equals a little tablet covered with wax.

EQUIPMENT 19
his name." l That settled it. But the friends won
dered at this strange agreement between husband and
wife on the new name. They took it as an omen of
something, but did not know what. But a real marvel
came now, for the mouth of Zacharias was instantly
opened and he began2 to speak. Now he blessed
God. No more had he doubt. But it was too much
for the crowd of neighbors, who were filled with fear,
a touch of reality that bears on the genuineness of the
story.3 So Zacharias had felt when the angel appeared
to him.4 It was awe. But other tongues were loosed
besides that of Zacharias.5 The talk went on6 through
out the length and breadth of the Hill Country.
Others, the more thoughtful and spiritual, laid it
all deep in their hearts with the query, " What then7
will this child be ? " No one could answer that ques
tion. With all the talk there was the hush of mystery
and reverence. Luke adds his own interpretation,8
which was in harmony with the deeper conviction of
the people in the Hill Country. But he introduces it
as an additional 9 point of view, more in accord with
the real facts, for Luke had the benefit of the later
developments. The expression, "the hand of the
Lord," is indeed peculiar to Luke10 in the New Testa
ment, but it is common in the Old Testament.11 No

1 Thus the Greek order in Luke 1 : 63.
2 eAaAei. Inchoative imperfect.
3 Plummer, in loco. 4 Luke 1 : 12. 'A zeugma in 1 : 64.
8 8i«AaAeiTo. Imperfect (descriptive durative).
7 ipa. In view of all that had happened.
¦ A habit of Luke it is to add such comments. Cf. 2 : 50; 3 : 15; 7 : 39,
etc. 9 nal yap.
18 Acts 4:28, 30; 11:21; 13:11.
" Cf. Ex. 7 : 4, 5; II Kings 3 : 15: Ezra 7 : 6, etc.

20 JOHN THE LOYAL
other explanation is possible to-day as one faces all
the facts preserved concerning John the Baptist.
The hand of the Lord was not merely upon1 him, but
with2 him, with him all the way to the very end, with
him from the very beginning, as Luke has now made
clear. One does not depreciate human freedom in
recognizing this to be true, nor is it unscientific. If
men to-day take a hand in the breeding of finer kinds
of animals, it is surely not impossible for (least of all,
unworthy of) God to place his hand beside the life of
the child who is to be the Herald of God's own Son.
The highest blessing possible for any child is to re
ceive in a real, if in a lesser, sense the blessing of
God's hand in his life.
9. The Insight of Zacharias. — The prophecy3 of
Zacharias was probably spoken at the time that his
tongue was loosed. The first word "Blessed" seems
to take up the "blessing" of verse 64. Luke has fin
ished his picture of the effect of that wonder, and now
resumes the narrative of the song of Zacharias (" Bene-
dictus"). The day of prophecy has come back and
Zacharias, like Elizabeth and Mary, is filled with the
Holy Spirit. He was probably not himself a very
learned priest.4 Moreover, the rabbi, not the priest,
was now the leading figure in the public eye.5 As a
"common priest" from the hills he was not one from
whom to expect a lofty or learned exposition of high
1 fiwt. 2 fiETa. 8 iirpoQriTevo-ev.
4 Edersheim (" Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah," vol. I, p. 141),
says he would have been called an ISuJttis (cf. iSiStoi about Peter and
John in Acts 4 : 13) priest, an amha-retz, a "rustic" priest, to be treated
with benevolent contempt.
8 Geike, " Life and Words of Christ," 1877, vol. I, p. 87.

EQUIPMENT 21
themes, that is, not from the point of view of the
learned priests and rabbis. Under Agrippa II "la
dies bought the high-priesthood for their husbands
for so much money," 1 and the priests, as a whole,
were a sort of national religious aristocracy. But
God has often passed by the high and the mighty
when he had a gift to bestow. He seeks out the choice
spirits, those who have an ear open to his voice. They
are often found in the Hill Country. It was necessary
for God to reveal his purpose through prophecy in
order " to revive, primarily in the small circles of the
pious in Israel, the long-sunk Messianic hopes of the
people." 2 The New Testament era has thus opened
some time, probably, in the year 6 B. C, with no blare
of trumpets, but with the definite outreach of God's
hand. In the midst of the prevalent coldness and
formalism, not to say corruption, there were found
some who would, and did, respond to the moving of
God's Spirit. Zacharias was not, probably, a great
man in native gifts, though he was to have a really
great son. The springs of greatness or genius are
hidden to mortal eye, and do not follow laws of
heredity that have been as yet traced. Nature prac
tises leaps as well as sports. But Zacharias was just
and pious and familiar with the Old Testament
prophecies. "As the 'Magnificat' is modelled on the
Psalms, so the ' Benedictus ' is modelled on the proph
ecies, and it has been called 'the last prophecy of
> Ibid., p. 89.
2 Weiss, "The Life of Christ," vol. I, p. 140. "These prophecies in the
circle of the pious, in the Hill Country of Judea, greet the first morning red
of the new time of salvation, which is already dawning full of hope"
(ibid., pp. 245 f.).

22 JOHN THE LOYAL
the Old Dispensation, and the first in the New.'
And while the tone of the 'Magnificat' is regal, that of
the ' Benedictus ' is sacerdotal. The one is as appro
priate to the daughter of David as the other is to the
son of Aaron." x That is clearly shown by parallel
columns which reveal the kinship to the language of
the Old Testament.2 During the months of silent
waiting one can well imagine that Zacharias had
turned often to the rolls of Isaiah, Ezekiel, Jeremiah,
Malachi, the Psalms, to see what, after all, the Old
Testament did say concerning the Messiah and the
Forerunner. The text of Westcott and Hort divides
the song of Zacharias into five strophes (68 f., 70-72,
73-75, 76 f., 78 f.).3 But there is a manifest cleavage
of the poem at verse 76 which breaks4 it into two
parts. The first part (68-75) is an exclamation of
praise to God for his goodness in the wonderful birth
of the child. The second part (76-79) is an address
to the child concerning his career in the kingdom.
In the one he describes the work of the Messiah, in
the other that of John.5 "Zacharias sees in his son
the earnest and guarantee of the deliverance of
Israel." 6 The words are so rich in meaning that
they command discussion. The three strophes of
70-75 set forth in exultant strain that the blessing of
redemption through David has come true at last
(68 f.), that God has remembered his holy covenant of
old (70-72), that God has kept his oath with Abraham
• Plummer, p. 39. 2 Cf. Plummer, p. 39.
8 Plummer, pp. 39 f. 4 Kal <ri> Si, iraiSiov.
B Godet, "Commentary on Luke," p. 69.
8 Plummer, p. 40.

EQUIPMENT 23
(73-75). The second part has two strophes; one
shows John as the Forerunner and the preacher of
forgiveness (76 f.), the other explains that the new
light will go even to those who sit in darkness and the
shadow of death (78 f.). Most of the phraseology is
found in the Septuagint, but it is not a mere chain of
quotations. They are welded into a real unity of
thought, and give a masterful and poetic interpreta
tion of the dealings of God with Israel. The past
finds its real justification in the present. It was for
this that God was patient and never gave up this re
bellious people. The promise is now reality. The
birth of John is a guarantee of that of the Messiah.1
God has visited,2 God will visit.3 It was surely time
for God to come again after so many centuries of
silence. Zacharias seems to have some conception of
the incarnation,4 though " redemption," 5 in his mind,
may have included political salvation6 as well as the
deeper and antecedent spiritual and moral elements
of personal renewal.7 The popular notion of the
Messianic kingdom had sunk to the level of a mere
political conquest and deliverance. The heel of
Rome pressed hard upon the neck of the patriotic
Jew. But that is a subordinate idea with Zacharias.
The "Moses of salvation" who is to come through
the house of David is the Messiah soon to be born
1 In 70-75 the aorist indicative occurs; in 76-79 the future indicative.
2 eiremw'i/iaTo. Punctiliar, but so recent that we have to say "has."
3 eirio-icei/reTai (N BL). Future, but certain. The word is not unlike
"visit," from video, and suggests "the familiarity of a friend and the
tenderness of a physician" (Reynolds, "John the Baptist," p. 112).
4 Godet, p. 69.
6 \vrpia<riv from kvrpov (ransom) 1 : 68.
8 aarnpiav i( «x*P^" **»•»" C1 = 71). ' 1 : 75, 77. Cf. Plummer.

24 JOHN THE LOYAL
of Mary. Abraham and the prophets are at last
justified. Freedom from oppression will give the
privilege of service to God in holiness and righteous
ness. With the eye of faith Zacharias now sees it all
as a reality. He turns to the child. He will walk
before Jehovah to make ready1 his ways. He will
bring knowledge of salvation which is found in for
giveness of sins.2 John will lay chief stress on the
spiritual elements. He concludes with a graphic
picture of night in the desert as of a lost caravan.
Jews3 as well as Gentiles sit in darkness, and the
shadow of death which has settled like a pall over all
the world. But, because of God's mercy, "the day-
spring4 from on high" will shine like a bright star in
the darkness "to guide our feet into the way of
peace." 5 It is a noble utterance. With it the voice
of Zacharias is heard no more, and he drops back into
the routine of his simple life in the hills. But his
heart is on the boy and he looks wistfully into his eyes
and into the future. Was it, after all, only a mirage
of the desert?
10. The Hidden Years in the Hills. — " And the child
grew and waxed strong in spirit." 6 Luke with these
words draws a veil over the life in the home of the
young John. The child grew and grew, a joy to
1 eroifidio-ai. Cf. Luke 3 : 4. John will quote the same word.
2 The first mention of "remission of sins" in the gospels (Plummer, p.
™)- 8 yp.as, iip.Stv.
4 ora-roArj. Cf . Isa. 9 : 2 for the image.
6 Luke 1 : 79. Peace was the word borne by the heavenly host on the
birth of Jesus (Luke 2 : 14). Alas, how slow the world is to walk in this
way I
8 Luke 1:80. ijujai*. Imperfect (so durative descriptive). Likewise
with efcparatouTo.

EQUIPMENT 25
his parents, whose strength inevitably was rapidly
going with their advanced years. He kept on gain
ing strength with his years. It was strength of spirit,
not merely that of body. Dr. John A. Broadus, as
long ago as 1874, made a few brief notes toward a life
of the Baptist. Alas! that the busy years found no
place for the completion of that congenial task. I
quote a few sentences at this point. "Not simply
strong in body, in mind, in passions, but in will — and
this not in self-will, but as a self-ruling will, strong in
self-restraint and self-impulse. A fearless, resolute,
determined, persevering, unconquerable character.
But does it not also include what we call distinctively
spiritual strength — strong faith in the unseen and
eternal, strong desire and purpose to lead a holy and
useful life?" It was then the normal life of a child
in a small town in the hills; he will soon be much out-
of-doors. One is at liberty to imagine the talk be
tween Zacharias and Elizabeth as some new develop
ment in the boy gave fresh confirmation to the words
of Gabriel or of Zacharias. It was just as God had
said. We do not know how soon the old couple died,
but it is hardly stretching the probabilities to suppose
that they lived long enough to create in John, or rather
cultivate what was inborn in him, a love for the Old
Testament and its great stories of mighty men and its
unfolding of a matchless future for Israel if Israel
were only faithful unto God. Elizabeth could tell of
Abraham almost in the very neighborhood of the
cave of Machpelah.1 And Zacharias could show
1 Reynolds, "John the Baptist," p. 116.

26 JOHN THE LOYAL
many of the places where David used to hide from
Saul in this den or in that. Not far away was Bethle
hem where he had tended his father's sheep. Here
was a comb of wild honey such as David had sought.
There is nothing more fascinating than a boy's grow
ing appreciation of his world as it unfolds around him.
I quote a few sentences from Dr. Broadus's notes on
John already mentioned: "He was a child of the
mountains. Whenever education and religion take
hold in a mountain region, the result is great strength
of character. The only son of a priest was likely to
be carefully educated, all the more when the child of
such promises. He was doubtless taught to read and
write, and from a child knew the Holy Scriptures.
At twelve or thirteen he would begin to attend the
feast of the Passover as a ' Son of the Law.' We can
not judge of his pursuits in early youth. The strict
Jewish custom that every son must learn a trade would
not apply to Levites, especially not to priests, as they
all had a calling divinely appointed. One thing we
know, he drank ' no wine nor strong drink.' " Did
Zacharias and Elizabeth tell John what was in store
for him? Or did they leave that to God? They
most naturally told him. The talk about John
would die down among the neighbors as he grew on
like other boys. Now and then a reminiscent old
woman would recall the early excitement and tell it
as a wonderful incident. But the years went by.
Will Zacharias and Elizabeth live to see the entrance
of John upon his great work? They knew, of course,
of the actual birth of Jesus at Bethlehem and of the

EQUIPMENT 27
death of Herod the Great. But it is growing late in
the evening for them both. The light is dim. They
draw the strong, noble boy closer to them. He has
already become fond of the hills, and sometimes wan
ders far. They have left their mark upon John — a
precious heritage of faith and spiritual fellowship.
One day the boy saw the light die on the face of one
or the other, and then of both. He was alone. Al
ready the voice of God had been calling to him in
a strange, mysterious way. Now he had no other
voice to call. He will follow that. He knew now
that the hand of God was with him. He will hold it
fast. Had not Zacharias and Elizabeth told him to
keep his heart open to the gate of heaven ?
11. The Voices in the Desert. — "And was in the
deserts till the day of his shewing unto Israel." J
But when did he go to "the deserts"? It is hard to
think that John would have left his aged parents
while alive. It may be assumed that they are now
dead. John was now probably grown (twenty or
twenty-one, not yet thirty, the Jewish legal manhood).
Josephus was sixteen when he went to the desert to
study three years under Banus, the famous- Essene.2
The point is that it was no raw, callow youth who
withdrew to the desert in a fret or for adventure.3
John had doubtless come to full consciousness of
himself, of his powers, of his mission. Besides, he
knew his world, as is plain when he emerges from his
1 Luke 1 : 80. 2 Josephus, "Life," § 2.
8 Josephus (ibid.) says that he went to the desert to learn the doctrines
of the Essenes (he had dabbled in those of the Sadducees and the Phari
sees) "that I might choose the best." He was a theological "taster."

28 JOHN THE LOYAL
voluntary retirement. He had "acquired personal
independence. His wants were religiously limited,
his tastes simple, and his dependence on his brother-
men therefore -reduced to a minimum." * Where did
he go? The expression "the deserts" 2 means "the
deserted regions." He did not have far to go to find
the barren rocks and cliffs of Judah, and had probably
made so many excursions into these regions that he
felt at home here. Love of solitude had become a
passion with him. "Meet foster-mother for one who
is to be the censor of his time." 3 The general region
called "desert" covered all the eastern portion of
Judah and part of Benjamin. It was in reality about
a third of Judah.4 It was (and is) not an absolute
desert, though badly cut up with wadys or canyons.
The soil was largely washed away, but grass would
grow where the soil still held, and shrubs and trees
would be found here and there. It was a mountain
highland that sloped down from a height of some
three thousand feet at Hebron to the abyss of the
Dead Sea, one thousand two hundred and ninety-two
feet below the Mediterranean. It was a wild, grand,
picturesque place. There were few inhabitants save
in the towns at the head and lower end of the Dead
Sea and on the higher plateau. There were sparse
settlements here and there, some Therapeutse, some
Essenes. But all in all it was to most people of the
time a forbidding region, full of hardship and even
danger. Jerome found no farms here, but shep-
1 Reynolds, "John the Baptist," p. 117.
2 iv rait jprijuois (sc. yals or x<"pn«). 8 Bruce, " Luke," in loco.
i Keim, "Jesus of Nazara," vol. II, p. 219.

EQUIPMENT 29
herds came with their flocks.1 Here the vipers would
be seen in clusters (broods) on the rocks. Not all of
John's familiarity with nature was gained in this
region. The winnowing fan, the axe at the root of
the tree he was familiar with before he came to the
desert. John had no settled abode in the desert. He
moved from place to place " in the deserts."
Why did John go to the wilderness? Hermits
went to the wilderness of Judea, as Josephus2 tells us
about Banus who "lived in the desert, and used no
other clothing than grew upon trees, and had no other
food than what grew of its own accord, and bathed
himself in cold water frequently." Josephus "imi
tated him in those things" for three years. Keim3
thinks that John also led a "hermit life." Certainly
he lived a solitary life, but, when he comes forth at last,
it is not as a hermit or man of the woods. He did
indeed lead " a rural life away from the capital," 4 but
it is by no means clear that he was an anchorite,
though many of them came to these regions. It has,
indeed, been urged that John went into the desert,
like Josephus, to study the doctrine of the Essenes
and that he became one. But there is no founda
tion for this idea. These cenobites had monasteries
along the shores of the Dead Sea. They numbered
some four thousand in all. The Essenes were an off
shoot of Pharisaism with ascetic tendencies concern
ing animal food, marriage and animal sacrifices, but
•Keim, "Jesus of Nazara," vol. II, p. 219. Cf. Smith, "Historical
Geography of Palestine." 2 "Life," § 2.
8 "Jesus of Nazara," vol. II, p. 220.
4 Smith, " In the Days of His Flesh," p. 25.

30 JOHN THE LOYAL
with an admixture of the philosophy of Parseeism and
Pythagoreanism, including the worship of the sun.1
But there is no real reason for thinking that John had
any contact with them; certainly he did not accept
their cardinal tenets about animal food (he ate locusts)2
nor marriage, which he did not condemn, nor about
sun-worship, which he did not practise. He did
practise the ascetic life as was true of many others
not Essenes, but he came forth and lived among men.
"He preached the Kingdom of God; they preached
isolation. They abandoned society; he strove to re
form it." 3 It is true that he fasted frequently, as his
disciples did later.4 But that was a common thing
with all Pharisees, who were surprised that Jesus and
his disciples did not fast. John was not peculiar
because of his stated fasting. Both John and Jesus
abstained from oaths and honored poverty as the
Essenes did.5 "The Essenes had renounced every
Messianic expectation; the soul of John's life and
ministry was the expectation of the Messiah and the
preparation for his work. The Essenes made matter
the seat of sin; John, by his energetic calls to con
version, shows plainly that he found it in the will." 8
The Essenes were pessimists who gave up the world;
John was a reformer who came to make it better.
It is true that John's retirement to. the desert was a
protest against the prevailing luxury and corruption.7
¦See Schuerer, "The Jewish People in the Times of Jesus Christ,"
second division, vol. II, pp. 189-218; Keim, "Jesus of Nazara," vol. I,
pp. 365 ff.; Lightfoot on Colossians, pp. 158-179.
2 Cheyne (" Encycl. Bibl.") takes locusts to mean carob-beans.
8 Plummer, "Luke," p. 44. 4 Matt. 9 :14.
6 Reynolds, "John the Baptist," p. 180. « Godet, "Luke," p. 73.
7 Lambert, " Hastings's D. C. G."

EQUIPMENT 31
His predecessor Amos " had been a herdsman and
a dresser of sycomores in that very region eight cen
turies before." 1 Like Amos, also, he would meditate
upon this high calling better in this wild and desolate
region. But John was no mere imitator of any one.
He was sui generis, and all the more so because of his
grapple with himself in the wilderness. He did not
go apart, as the usual monastic does, to gain merit
with God,2 but to face his life problem and to adjust
himself to it. His going was " an absolute break with
the prevalent Pharisaic type of piety." 3 He went,
not to stay, but to get ready to come back, to come
back to save his people.4 But John "learned his
lesson at the feet of no human teacher." 5 Reynolds6
has a fine word: "His education was the memory of
his childhood and the knowledge of his commission,
and was effected by the Spirit of the living God. His
schoolmasters were the rocks of the desert of Judea,
the solemn waters of the Dead Sea, the eternal Pres
ence that fills the solitudes of nature, the sins, the
shame, the vows, the hopes, the professions of his
countrymen." 7
He had withdrawn in no selfish spirit, certainly not
to shirk his duty. Much of the hermit and monastic
' Smith, "In the Days of His Flesh," p. 26.
2 Keim, "Jesus of Nazara," vol. II, p. 222.
8 Lambert, "Hastings's D. C. G."
4 Keim, "Jesus of Nazara," vol. II, p. 222.
8 Nourse, "Standard Bible Dictionary." 8 "John the Baptist," p. 118.
i Cf. Wordsworth :
" He knew the rocks which angels haunt
On the mountains visitant ;
He hath kenned them taking wing. . . .
His daily teachers had been woods and rills,
The silence that is in the starry sky,
The sleep that is among the lonely hills."

32 JOHN THE LOYAL
life of the ages has really been a species of selfishness,
as citizens to-day withdraw from politics and leave the
government of the cities to the "bosses" and corrupt
professional politicians. The precise example of John
in his wilderness life is not necessarily a model for us,
certainly not for all. But it is beyond doubt that in
our restless, feverish age men would be greatly helped
by taking time for reflection and meditation. John
gained much by his voluntary and temporary with
drawal to the desert. He gained robust health from
simple, wholesome fare and life out in the open air.
This sturdiness of body will stand him in good stead
during the severe strain of open-air preaching to great
crowds.1 It is a curious notion held by some people
that emaciation is a sign of piety.
It is without doubt true that John's imagination
was cultivated by the wild grandeur all about him.
The deep gorges, the high cliffs, the daring leap of a
wild goat, the flight of an eagle, the flash of the light
ning, the fury of the storm on the bare rocks — these
would all have an exalting influence on his mind.
He may have had rolls of the prophets with him,
which he would read in these impressive surroundings.
He often quotes the picturesque passages of the Old
Testament.2 Nature has also a distinct influence
toward devotion when one yields himself to its noblest
impressions. He would worship in the temple of
nature, but not the sun, but Jehovah, the God of
1 Farrar ("Life of Christ," vol. I, p. 107) considers John emaciated.
2Tasker, "Hastings's One Volume Dictionary." Thus (Luke 3-17
and Acts 9:9; Isa. 66 : 24; John 1 : 23 and Isa. 40 : 3; John 1 • 29 and
Isa. 53 : 7).

EQUIPMENT 33
Israel (the true Israel), and of nature. Jesus went
often to the mountains to pray alone with the Father.
Was not the hand of the Lord still with him in the
desert? Is it mere speculation to suppose that John
"was led by the Spirit into the wilderness" as Jesus
was in later years? Indeed, it is hardly probable
that the devil left John alone during these years in
retirement. Those who flee from society merely to
escape temptation should remember that Jesus met
the devil in the desert as well as on the pinnacle of
the temple.
John had a new angle of vision in the wilderness.
He could contemplate from a distance the moral and
spiritual condition of his people. He could seek to
discover the causes of the lapse in public life. He
could search for a remedy. If he was to be a re
former he must be more than a denunciator of present
conditions. It was not hard to criticise the Pharisees
and Sadducees. Could he offer the people anything
better ?
12. The Call to Cry. — He knew, we may assume,
his mission as he had been told it by his parents. He
had communed with the master spirits of the olden
days. But the prophetic fire had not yet blazed
within him. He was willing to bide his time. One
must not forget the self-restraint of John during these
years. "The nature of John was full of impetuosity
and fire. ... If he had won peace in the long prayer
and penitence of his life in the wilderness, it was not
the spontaneous peace of a placid and holy soul.
The victory he had won was still encumbered with

34 JOHN THE LOYAL
traces of the battle. . . . While he was musing the
fire burned, and at the last he spake with his tongue.
... In solitude he had learnt things unspeakable;
there the unseen world had become to him a reality;
there his spirit had caught a touch of phantasy and
flame. . . . He had received a revelation not vouch
safed to ordinary men — attained, not in the schools
of the Rabbis, but in the school of solitude, in the
school of God." x Probably it was gradual, this con
viction on John's part, that he must speak. The
message was taking shape in his mind. Possibly re
ports came to him of unusual shortcomings on the part
of the religious leaders in Jerusalem. " As he brooded
on the signs of the times, the barren trees of the desert
fit only for burning, and the vipers fleeing before the
flaming scrub, became emblems of the nation's peril,
and lent color to his warnings of impending wrath." 2
Yes, and the Spirit of God put a live coal upon his
lip. The fire burned within his heart. He felt the
woe of the true preacher upon him if he did not speak.
But, after all, who was he, a man of the desert, a
Nazirite, poor and unknown, who was he to lift up
his voice against the great forces of Jewish life in
Jerusalem? He doubtless had his moments of re
action, but the call came back, and louder. There
was no peace. He had to speak even if no one heard.
He dared not go to Jerusalem in his garb, nor would
he be likely to gain a hearing there. He had his voice
if he had no synagogue nor temple court. Indeed, he
1 Farrar, "Life of Christ," vol. I, pp. 108 f.
2Tasker, "Hastings's One Volume Dictionary." Cf. Smith, "Histori
cal Geography of Palestine," p. 495.

EQUIPMENT 35
had no audience but the eagles, the goats, and the
vipers. But he must speak. " The day of his shew
ing1 unto Israel " had come. Plummer2 suggests that
John may have gone up to Jerusalem for the feasts.
But the word "shewing" hardly means that, though
it does imply a rather formal installation into office.3
But it was in the wilderness that God met John (cf.
Moses at the Burning Bush). In the wilderness John
began to cry.4 "The word of God came unto John
the son of Zacharias in the wilderness." 5 He had
long been listening for that word. Now it has come,
and it finds him ready.
» ivaSelttos. Luke 1 : 80. 8 " Luke," p. 44.
'Godet, "Luke," p. 73. ! Matt. 3:1. « Luke 3: 2.

CHAPTER II
CHALLENGE
"Repent ye, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand"
(Matt. 3:2).
1. The Time. — Matthew1 merely says "in those
days," while Mark2 succinctly and vividly describes
the appearance of John as " the beginning of the gos
pel of Jesus Christ the Son of God." Matthew is not
concerned with exact dates. Mark is justified by the
word of Jesus3 in making John the beginning of the
New Dispensation. The actual outward beginning
was when John lifted up his voice in the wilderness.
"Until John," Jesus said. There was a grand, an
awful silence in the preceding centuries till the new
prophet spoke.4 "It was the glory of the Baptist to
have revived the function of the prophet." 5 Holtz
mann6 (Oscar) thinks that " scarcely any great intel
lectual movement that the world has known has had
a simpler and less pretentious beginning than Chris
tianity." Luke is fully conscious that the new era opens with
John. He has the historian's sense of the importance
of the beginning of the new time. He seeks to relate
¦3:1. «1:1. 'Matt. 11: 12 f.; Luke 16: 16.
' Edersheim, " Life and Times of Jesus," vol. I, p. 255.
B "Ecce Homo." p. 2. Cf. Bengel, "Hie quasi scena N. T. panditur."
8 "The Life of Jesus," p. 109. 36

CHALLENGE 37
it to the world by a sixfold date after the fashion of
Thucydides with his sixfold date of the entry of the
Thebans into Plataea.1 This synchronistic date2 in
cludes the political and ecclesiastical rulers of Pales
tine. The political rulers are naturally the Emperor
Tiberius Caesar, who ruled over all; Pontius Pilate,
the new governor of Judea under Tiberius; Herod
(Antipas), the Tetrarch of Galilee (and Perea), whose
subject Jesus was, and to whom he paid taxes; Philip,
the Tetrarch of Iturea and Trachonitis, where Jesus
found refuge (Caesarea Philippi). The mention of
Lysanias, the Tetrarch of Abilene, is not so natural.
It is possible that Abilene had once belonged to
Herod the Great, since Claudius gave it to Herod
Agrippa I.3 The word tetrarch4 literally means ruler
of a fourth part.5 The four great divisions of Her
od's kingdom would thus receive mention. Luke's
accuracy has been challenged on the ground of this
mention of Lysanias of Abilene, which is unsupported
by any other evidence, though one by that name is
known who lived six years before.6 But Schuerer con
tends that Luke is thoroughly correct. Philip ruled
from B. C. 4-A. D. 39, Herod Antipas from B. C.
4-A. D. 39, Pontius Pilate from A. D. 26-36.7 The
only exact note of time is in connection with Tiberius,
1 Plummer, " Luke," p. 80.
2 Holtzmann, "Life of Jesus," p. 109.
8Godet, "Luke," p. 108; Josephus, "Ant.," xix, 5, 1.
4 TeTpaapxoivros 3 : 1. Three times here.
6 Cf. the four provinces of Thessaly in Eur. "Ale," 1154. This is the
only mention in the New Testament, but see Josephus, " War," iii, 10; 7.
Cf. Plummer, p. 82.
8 " The Jewish People," etc., div. I, vol. II, p. 338. Cf. Godet, " Luke,"
p. 107.
7 Holtzmann ("Life of Jesus," p. 110) puts his date A. D. 27-37.

38 JOHN THE LOYAL
in the fifteenth year of whose reign John made his
public appearance as a prophet. Now Tiberius was
emperor from A. D. 14-37. So fourteen years plus
fourteen would equal twenty-eight. Holtzmann1 so
takes it, and justifies Luke's date. But Jesus was
probably put to death at the Passover of A. D. 29 or
30. He seems to have entered upon his ministry
when thirty years old ("about thirty")2 and was six
months younger than John. This interval between
the beginning of John's ministry and that of Jesus
cannot, of course, be known with absolute certainty,
but the period of six months seems probable. How
ever, A. D. 28 appears to be too late for the beginning
of John's work, since the ministry of Jesus was at
least two and a half years long. It is known that in
the provinces Tiberius was associated with Augustus
in the rule for two years.3 It is entirely possible, even
probable, that Luke, writing about the provincial
rule, and in the provinces himself, has this in mind.
If so, A. D. 26 would be the latest date for John's
ministry possible, and more probably A. D. 25, unless
the mention of Pilate (A. D. 26) is conclusive for 26.
We do not know the time of year when John began
his ministry. It is hardly worth while to tarry over
Luke's use of the un technical "governor"4 rather
than the more exact " Procurator." 5 The ecclesi
astical rulers mentioned are two, Annas and Caiaphas.8
1 Ibid. 2 Luke 3 : 23.
8 Suet., "Tib.," xxi; "Veil. Paterc," ii, 121. Cf. Godet, "Luke" d
106; Plummer, p. 82.
4 iyciLovevovTos. 5 D reads eirtTpoirevoi/ros.
8 Note idiomatic use of «ri. The mention of ipxitpim only once is
"probably not accidental, and certainly not ironical" (Plummer)

CHALLENGE 39
The same expression occurs in Acts 4 : 6 (" Annas the
high-priest and Caiaphas"). As a matter of fact,
Annas was actual high-priest from A. D. 7-14, when
he was deposed. His son-in-law, Caiaphas, was high-
priest from A. D. 18-36. They either shared the
office between them or Annas was considered high-
priest de jure and Caiaphas de facto. This situation
explains the connection of Annas with the trial of
Jesus.1 Thus, then, Luke gives us an outlook upon the
world of John's time. John, so far as we know, had
no special dealings with Tiberius, who perhaps never
heard of the new sensation on the Jordan. But he
did have direct dealings with Herod Antipas. John
was not the kind of preacher who made an absolute
divorce between religion and politics. He tried to
put religious principles into politicians. We have no
evidence that Annas and Caiaphas ever saw John,
but they took notice of John, as we shall see.2 John
was not oblivious of the public about him.3
Luke seems to have a sense of the fulness of the
time that he shows in connection with the coming of
the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost.4 Greek
philosophy had issued in cynical pride or reckless
abandon. Roman power was on the principle that
might is right. "The idea of conscience, as we
understand it, was unknown to heathenism. Abso
lute right did not exist." 5 Hellenism had pressed
1 John 18 : 13, 19. 2 John 1 : 19.
8 Tiberius " was a malicious and furious man, unwilling to do anything
that he thought would please his subjects" (Philo, "Leg.," 1033). Cf.
Geike, "Life and Words of Christ," vol. I, p. 381. 4 Acts 2 : 1.
8 Edersheim, "Life and Times of Jesus," vol. I, p. 259.

40 JOHN THE LOYAL
the Jews into a corner. The more devout and pa
triotic spirits had made a noble and (for a time) suc
cessful stand against the Hellenizers. The glories of
the Maccabean struggle were as noble traditions as
Judaism had. But even the Maccabees fell under
the spell of Greece. Pharisaism was the hard protest
of a resentful people who clung to their traditions.1
The time had come for a change. The darkest hour
is just before the dawn. Luke's interest in the date
of John's appearance is not simply because of John.
It is due to the fact that John was the Forerunner of
Jesus. It is the revolution wrought by Christianity
which concerns Luke. "It was indeed a striking
coincidence that just where Israel of old had entered
the Land of Promise, the door of the Kingdom of
Heaven should in those last days be opened." 2
2. The Place. — Mark3 has simply "in the wilder
ness," but that is clear enough. Matthew4 adds " of
Judea," while Luke5 explains that "he came into all
the region round about Jordan." 6 He was already
in the desert when the word of the Lord came to him.
So he began preaching where he was to the few passers
by or cenobites. The news rapidly spread that a real
prophet had appeared, the first since Malachi (c. 460-
430 B. C). But it is an itinerant ministry. The
people came to John, but he moved on to the Jordan.
The term wilderness included all the Jordan valley,
or El-Ghor. He probably began in the south and
1 " All real belief in a personal continuance after death must have
ceased among the educated classes" (ibid., p. 257).
2 Smith, "In the Days of His Flesh," p. 26.
"1:4. 4 3 : 1. 8 3 : 3. • veplXupov. Cf. Gen. 13 : 10 f.

CHALLENGE 41
moved on north, and was now on one side of the Jor
dan, now on the other.1 He finally went near the
border of the Sea of Galilee.2
"His selection of the valley of the Jordan as his
sphere of work was partly determined by the need of
water for immersion." 3 In the early stages of his
ministry we may think of him as in the lower Jordan
valley, a litde above the Dead Sea. He would move
up the river. Bruce4 thinks that he found a place
by the river convenient for baptism, and then settled
there. The Jordan ("the descender") has many
memories (Joshua, Naaman, Elisha, etc), but its
fame rests mainly on the work of John in this min
istry. To the Jordan Jesus came for baptism. In a
true sense the Jordan was John's river. Its principal
source was on Mount Hermon, seventeen hundred
feet above the sea, and it sank into the Dead Sea
twelve hundred and ninety-two feet below the sea.
The Dead Sea itself was some thirteen hundred feet
deep.5 The valley between the Sea of Galilee and the
Dead Sea varied from two to six miles in width."
" Winding about in this long, narrow valley is another
depressed valley (forty to one hundred and fifty feet
deeper), of several hundred yards in width; and
within this the actual bed of the river sinks deeper
still."6 The one is El-Ghor, the other is El-Zor. It
is only sixty-five miles between the Sea of Galilee and
1 Plummer, "Luke," p. 85. Cf. John 1 : 28; 10 : 40.
2 John 3 : 23.
"Hummer, "Luke," pp. 85 f. Cf. Stanley, "Sinai and Palestine,"
p. 312. 4 "Luke," in loco.
6 Broadus, " Commentary on Matthew," p. 43.
¦ Ibid., p. 43.

42 JOHN THE LOYAL
the Dead Sea, but the actual winding of the river here
is some two hundred miles. The amount of water in
the river varies in different places and at different
seasons of the year. There are numerous fords *up
and down the river. When the snows of Hermon
melt in the spring, the water is high. In places it
will be seventy-five feet wide and ten feet deep. At
the rapids it would be only a few inches deep. But
there is no place on the Jordan where we know cer
tainly that John was save Bethany, beyond Jordan,1
and Enon, near to Salim.2 This latter was probably
some distance from the Jordan, where were many
pools.3 But the people could find John even in the
wilderness. 3. The First Glimpse of the Man. — "Now John
himself." 4 After all, the man is more interesting and
important than his surroundings. His dress was
striking and would at once arrest attention. It was
like that of Banus, described by Josephus.5 But it
was more like that of the prophets. It was probably
the coarse, rude garment woven of camel's hair.6 It
is worth noting that the Oriental people did not care
for this camel's hair cloth as much as Westerners do
now.7 Elijah, indeed, wore a sheepskin mantle8 as
some writers think was true of John.9 But the Greek
idiom is against it. Some of the saints in times of
¦ John 1 : 28. On the eastern side.
2 John 3 : 23. On the western side. ' uSara iroMd.
4 Matt. 3: 4; ovriij SJ o "Iiowtis. 8 "Life," § 2.
8 arrb rpix&v nap-ijAoi) (Matt. 3 : 4; Mark 1 : 6). Cf. Zech. 13 : 4.
7 Holtzmann, "Life of Jesus," p. 113.
8 I Kings 19 : 19.
9 Cf . Cheyne, " Encycl. Bibl. " D does read Sippw KarfKov in Mark 3 : 6,
probably from Zechariah. Cf. Swete on Mark 3 : 6.

CHALLENGE 43
emergency had worn sheepskins and goatskins.1 It
is possible, indeed, that John is consciously imitating
in a general way the garb of Elijah.2 It was probably
a garment of sackcloth woven of camel's hair that
John wore. The leathern girdle was also like that
worn by Elijah3 "in contrast with the metal girdles
which the ancients preferred." 4 But this imitation
of dress was not mere artificial copying. He had the
mood of Elijah.5 His very garb preached a lesson to
that profligate age. His diet was as simple as his
dress. The wild honey6 was abundant in the clefts
of the rocks. Some scholars think that it was tree
honey that exuded from the palms and fig-trees.
Bruce7 holds to this idea on the ground that it was
poorer food than the bee honey, which was nourishing
and plentiful, if a luxury in some sections. But
surely Swete8 is right in holding to the natural mean
ing of bee honey (mountain honey). There is dis
pute as to the "locusts" also.9 The notion that he
ate the carob-bean is held by some. The Ebionites
restricted John's diet to cakes made with honey or
to honey alone.10 There were clean locusts and unclean
locusts. Four kinds of clean locusts are mentioned
in Lev. 11 : 22 (Septuagint).11 To-day the Bedouins
eat many kinds of locusts. The legs and wings are
stripped off and the rest is boiled, baked or roasted.
1 Heb. 11 : 37.
2 Plummer on Matthew, p. 27; Weiss, "Life of Christ," vol. I, p. 308.
8 II Kings 1 : 8.
4 Holtzmann, "Life of Jesus," p. 113.
8 Bruce on Matthew, 3 : 4.
8 p.iki aypiov. ' Matt. 3:6. 8 Mark 1:6. 9 a/tpi'Ses.
18 Nicholson, " Gospel According to the Hebrews," p. 34.
11 The Gemarists found eight hundred kinds of clean or edible locusts
(Swete on Mark 1:6).

44 JOHN THE LOYAL
They are considered good food and sold in the mar
ket.1 Evidently John was not a vegetarian if he ate
these locusts and bee honey. At any rate he had
plenty of good food, if it was decidedly monotonous.
One may compare the use of Irish potatoes by the
poor in Ireland and porridge by the poor in Scotland,
not to mention fish and rice in Japan. But John's
personal attraction was even more remarkable than
his dress.2 John's powerful personality was most
impressive. It is a mere silhouette that Mark (and
Matthew) has drawn for us. The lines are sharply
cut and John stands out boldly and clearly. He was
no charlatan, no trickster, no oddity. In reality, his
dress and food comported well with the sturdiness of
his nature, the courage of his message, the purity of
his look, the directness of his speech, the elevation of
his spirit. Alexander Maclaren3 says: "John leaps,
as it were, into the arena full grown and full armed."
He springs forward with the same startling sudden
ness with which Elijah enters the scene.4 Those who
saw him would never forget him. They would be
sure to tell others about him. Soon he was the talk of
all Judea. But what did it all mean ? What did he
claim about himself ?
4. The Scriptural Similitude. — John himself origi
nated the idea that he was the Forerunner of the
Messiah, the Voice crying in the wilderness, for he
1 Bruce on Matt. 3 : 4.
2 Holtzmann, "Life of Jesus," p. 114. " In the east such externals are
supposed to lend a higher significance to the appearance" (Weiss, "Life
of Christ," vol. I, p. 308).
8 As quoted by Plummer on Matthew, p. 27.
4 1 Kings 17:1. Cf. Plummer on Matthew, p. 27; Didon. "Jesus
Christ," pp. 191, 196.

CHALLENGE 45
quotes Isa. 40 : 3 to the embassy from Jerusalem,1
and applies it to himself. It is possible that in Matt.
3 : 3 we have the language of John also, but it is more
probable that it is that of the Evangelist.2 All four
gospels thus bear witness to this "primitive interpre
tation" 3 that John is the Forerunner described by
Isaiah. Mr. W. P. Bradley4 makes a curious argu
ment to prove that while John did claim to be the
Forerunner, he did not admit Jesus to be the Messiah.
He notes properly that Mark is the earliest gospel
and John the latest. Mark5 and Matthew6 state that
John was Elijah that was to come, while John's gos
pel 7 represents the Baptist as denying it. What John's
disclaimer really means will be discussed directly.
But Mr. Bradley makes much of the fact that Mark
and Luke do not represent John the Baptist as
identifying Jesus with the Messiah. Therefore he
did not really believe Jesus to be the Messiah. It
is hard to take such straining after novelty as serious
criticism. But, this aside, it is clear that as John
stepped forth upon his mission, he is fully conscious
that he is the Forerunner predicted long ago, who was
to be the Herald 8 of the New Dispensation. In the
prophetic picture the Forerunner has a place by the
side of the Messiah.9
In what sense was John Elijah ? " Everything in
1 John 1 : 23. 2 " For this is he."
8 Plummer, "Luke," p. 86. Mark (1 : 2) quotes from Mal. 3: 1 and
(in the best MSS.) attributes the whole to Isaiah as the greater and more
prominent of the two prophets whose words are here combined.
4 Biblical. World, May and June, 1910.
89:llf. 8 11 : 14; 17 : 10-13. '1:19-24.
8 Ki)pva-a-iav (nijpvt-) Matt. 3 : 1.
8Godet, "Luke," p. 110.

46 JOHN THE LOYAL
him recalled the great prophet of action. Elijah did
not write a single page in the Book of God; his book
was himself, his prophecy was his life; it was enough
for him to appear, to call up before degenerate Israel
the living image of holiness." 1 There runs a real
parallel between the careers of the two men. It is
strikingly put by Edersheim.2 " John came suddenly
out of the wilderness of Judea, as Elijah from the
wilds of Gilead. John bore the same ascetic appear
ance as his predecessor; the message of John was the
counterpart of that of Elijah; his baptism that of
Elijah's novel rite on Carmel." It is true that John
pointedly disclaimed being Elijah,3 but what he de
nied was the exaggerated expectations of the people,4
not the real promise of the prophet.5 Indeed, it was
probably some word of John about this very matter
that had led the Sanhedrin to make this inquiry, a
word which had been misunderstood and which John
now bluntly corrects. Jesus expressly says that John
was the real fulfilment of the prophecy, he was the
Elijah that was to come,6 in the spirit and power of
Elijah as Gabriel had said.7 That is all that was ever
meant, but it had been grossly misunderstood again.8
The Jewish expectations about Elijah as Forerun
ner were varied. It is probable that many teachers
before John were asked, "Art thou Elijah?" The
expectation was general that Elijah would come before
1 Pressensg, "Jesus Christ," p. 238.
2 "Life and Times of Jesus Christ," vol. I, p. 255.
8 John 1 : 21-23.
4 Westcott on John, vol. I, p. 34. t Mal 4 • 5
8 Mark 9 : 11 f.; Matt. 11 : 14; 17 : 12.
' Luke 1 = 17- 8 Matt. 17 : 10.

CHALLENGE 47
the Messiah appeared. The "scribes" of Christ's
day said that he "must" 4 come first. It became the
custom at circumcisions for a chair to be placed for
Elijah, as witness, and to cry, "Elias, come soon."2
There would be the vague hope that the boy might
prove to be Elijah who was going to come.3 It is not
clear that Jesus means that Elijah was to come still
another time, because of the language in Matt. 17 : 11:
"Elias comes and will restore all things." In Mark
9 : 11 it is "Elias comes first and restores all things."
The present is rather from the point of view of the
ancient prophecy. Jesus at once adds that Elijah
has come.4 The rabbis (scribes) expected that Elijah
would come as a consoler, and to discriminate between
things clean and unclean.5 He was expected "three
days" before the Messiah, and it was believed that
"he would come in the mountains of Israel, weeping
over the people, saying, O Land of Israel, how long
will you remain arid and desolate?"6 "His voice
shall be heard from one end of the world to another." 7
The Jews kept on looking for the coming of Elijah.
"Abdallah, the fierce lord of Acre, almost died of
terror from a vision in which he believed himself to
have seen Elijah sitting on the top of Carmel." 8 It
was not clear to the rabbis how Elijah would come,
1 Mark 9:11; Matt. 17 : 11. Set e\&eiv npirrov.
2 Keim, "Jesus of Nazara," vol. II, p. 231. Cf. Pirke R. Eliezer, c. 29.
3 6 p.i\\av ipxe<r&ai. Mark 11: 15.
* rjaij Ikdev in Mark 9 : 12 and iMjluifav in Matt. 17 : 13.
8 Schoettgen, "De Messia, Hor. Hebr.," vol. II, p. 226.
' Jalkut Sim., ii, foi. 53, 3 (Schoettgen), " Hor. Hebr.," pp. 534 ff. Cf.
also J. Lightfoot for further collection of rabbinical passages.
' Perikta Rabbathi, foi. 62, 1. Cf . Reynolds, " John the Baptist," p. 223.
8 Grove, Article "Elijah," in "Smith's B. D." Cf. Reynolds, "John
the Baptist," p. 222.

48 JOHN THE LOYAL
but they distinguished between his coming and that of
the Messiah as is seen in the question of the embassy
to John.1 "Whether the Tishbite himself was ex
pected to return in his chariot of flame, from the un
known paradise into which he had been caught, or
whether his spirit, by a metempsychosis, was to be
re-embodied in the breast of some sage Pharisee or
brave warrior, or whether the highest stage of Es-
senic culture was itself the possession of the Elijah-
ship, did not seem to have been settled." 2 Indeed,
according to the Talmud, as quoted by Lightfoot on
Matt. 17 : 10, Elijah had frequently appeared to wise
men in the past. The question of the three disciples
about the coming of Elijah, as they came down from
the Mount of Transfiguration, was a most natural
and obvious one. There were popular expectations of
the return of Jeremiah, the prophet foretold by Moses,
or others of the prophets, and some even looked for
several forerunners.3 We think of Isaiah as the great
est of the prophets, but the Jews of our Lord's time
held Elijah, Jeremiah, Daniel to be first. One may
note the popular expectations about the return of
Nero, Barbarossa, etc. Edersheim (" Life and Times
of Jesus," vol. II, Appendix viii) gives a good sketch
of rabbinic traditions about Elijah. The time of his
coming will "be a time of genuine repentance by
Israel." What was the original meaning of Isaiah? The
1 John 1 : 21.
2 Reynolds, "John the Baptist," p. 222. But "John had no sympathy
with the popular superstition that the spirit of the Tishbite was hovering
on the hills of Judea, waiting for a new embodiment" (ibid, p. 226)
8 Matt. 11:3; 16 : 4; John 1 : 21 f.

CHALLENGE 49
usual interpretation of Isa. 40 : 3-5 quoted by Luke1
is that the picture is that of the return of the Jews
from exile with Jehovah at the head of the people as
they enter Jerusalem.2 The custom of preparing the
road for the Eastern king to travel is probably the
basis for the image in Isaiah. But Godet3 challenges
the ordinary application to the return from exile. It
is, he holds, rather God who comes to the people in
their cities. The people are called upon by the
courier to make ready the road by which the monarch
is to enter. There is something to be said for this
view. "Say unto the cities of Judah, Behold, your
God! Behold, the Lord Jehovah will come a mighty
one, and his arm will rule for him. He will feed his
flock like a shepherd, he will gather the lambs in his
arms, and carry them in his bosom, and will gently
lead those that have their young." 4
Jehovah is getting ready to visit the cities of Israel.
"Prepare ye in the wilderness the way of Jehovah,"
the way which he is to travel. It is a picture of grad
ing on mountain and in valley. John seizes upon this
bold picture and applies it to himself. It was a per
fectly natural use of it. In Isaiah " in the wilderness"
goes with " prepare," and that is possible in the synop
tics, though the editors generally connect it with " cry
ing." Both points are true. The preparation was
to be made in the wilderness, and the crying was the
beginning of the preparation. "The voice of one
1 Matthew and Mark quote only Isa. 40 : 3.
2 Broadus, " Commentary on Matthew," p. 37.
5 "Commentary on Luke," p. 111.
4 Isa. 40 : 10 f.

50 JOHN THE LOYAL
saying, Cry. And one said, What shall I cry?"1
The fire was in John's bones. He had to cry. " Be
hold, the day cometh, it burneth as a furnace." 2
Judgment was at hand. "Behold, I send my mes
senger, and he shall prepare the way before me: and
the Lord, whom ye seek, will suddenly come to his
temple." 3 " Behold, I will send Elijah the prophet
before the great and terrible day of Jehovah come.
And he shall turn the heart of the fathers to the chil
dren, and the heart of the children to their fathers;
lest I come and smite the earth with a curse." 4 The
first word in the New Testament is the promise of
Gabriel to Zacharias that this promise is to come
true at once. The last word in the Old Testament
prophecy is that about Elijah's return. Behind that
promise hung suspended the impending curse, like a
Damascus blade, over the people of Israel. Sud
denly a voice was heard in the wilderness which
claimed to be that of Elijah! Instantly all listened
to that Voice. Was it true ? Jesus said of John that
he was Elijah "if ye are willing to receive it" (Matt.
11 : 14). But are the Jews willing to receive it?
Was a Forerunner necessary? If one is disposed
to question the wisdom of the mission of John as a
herald of the King, let him reflect on what would
have been the reception accorded to Jesus without
the preparation made by the Baptist. "He came
unto his own5 and his own6 received him not." 7
1 Isa. 40 : 6. 2 Mal. 4:1. 8 Mal. 3:1. 4 Mal. 4 : 5 f.
6 eis tA iSio. His own places, his own haunts, his home. Cf . <?is tA iSia
for "home," in John 19: 27.
" oi ISioi. His own people, the Jews. J John 1:11.

CHALLENGE 51
They rejected him after all? Yes, but John pre
pared some soil for the Messiah's sowing. Those who
first responded to Jesus came from the group of John's
disciples.1 The people will go from John to Jesus.2
The people will recognize and believe in Jesus as the
Messiah because of what John had said.8 We know
how quick the authorities in Jerusalem were to resent
the assumption of Jesus as it was.4 Brief as was the
ministry of Jesus, it probably lasted as long as it did,
humanly speaking, because of the ministry of John.
He in a sense held off the "hour" of Jesus till Christ
had at least had a hearing by people and leaders.
Besides the keenest interest was excited in the subject
of the Messiah. The masses began to wonder wist
fully in their hearts if haply John5 were not the Mes
siah himself. He served to rekindle the flame of
Messianic expectation that had burned very low.
The Sadducees had given up all hope of a Messiah.
During the glorious Maccabean rule the Pharisees had
blazed with patriotic hopes of a political Messiah who
should make a great Jewish kingdom all over the
world.6 But the heel of Rome now pressed upon the
neck of the Jew. Already there was the smouldering
fire that later burnt into lurid flame against Rome.
The Zealots had vowed vengeance against Rome.
The spiritual features of the Messiah as portrayed in
the Old Testament had faded from the mind of most.
The Jews were sunk in formalism and secularism.
The hopelessness of the people at large concerning a
1 John 1 : 35 ff . 2 John 3 : 26. ¦ John 10 : 40-42.
4 John 2 : 13-25. 5 /«} irore ouros «it) 6 xpio-Tos.
8 Cf. "The Psalms of Solomon."

52 JOHN THE LOYAL
Messiah is seen in the wailing note in I Maccabees,
three times1 to the effect that there was no prophet in
Israel. So it was with most minds, till John's voice
was heard in the wilderness; the Messianic hope was
inoperative. The Zealots had given the world up as
lost. There were a few, like Simeon and Anna,2 who
were waiting for the consolation of Israel.3 The
Christian movement began with John. The ground
was made ready by him. Jesus may have had John
in mind when he spoke of the one who sows and the
one who reaps who have joy together.4 John came
not merely to prepare men's minds for the Messiah,
but their lives also. If the Messiah comes, who is
worthy to go forth to greet him ?
5. The Startling Proclamation. — It may be said that
it is not hard to set a nation on fire. One may recall
Martin Luther, whose theses spread like wildfire, or
John Wesley's preaching, which blazed like a torch
all over England.5 John did no miracle6 with which
to startle the people or attract attention. He probably
came with some reputation for piety because of his life
of seclusion in the desert, and some few may have
known about his remarkable birth. But John's great
impression was not due to any special predisposition on
the part of the people to hear him nor to personal
peculiarities. These matters chimed in with his claim
to be the Forerunner.7 It is a superficial view (Strauss)
'4:46; 9:27; 14:41. 2 Luke 2 : 23-38.
8 Some were driven by the very miseries of the time to long for the
Messiah (Smith, "Days of His Flesh,'' p. 27).
4 Iva o o-ireiptav buov X°*PW Ka* ° tfepifwi'. 3ohn 4 : 36.
8 Lange, " Life of Christ," vol. II, pp. 9 f. 8 John 10 ¦ 41
7 Smith, "In the Days of His Flesh," p. 27.

CHALLENGE 53
to say that John shrewdly discerned the signs of the
times, and proclaimed himself the Forerunner because
he saw that the people were eager for the Messianic
era.1 It was the preaching of John that drew the
crowds, that starded the people of his time. He had
a message that always wins " a response in the human
heart — sin and judgment, repentance and forgiveness." 2
We have only scraps and fragments of that message,
hardly two pages in all. But that cry of John is still
heard wherever the gospel goes. We shall need to
study a little more in detail the elements of his power
as a preacher and the various doctrines enunciated by
him. Just here we are concerned with his funda
mental proclamation: "Repent ye; for the kingdom
of heaven is at hand." 3 The words rang out sharp
and clear and echoed throughout Judea. Jesus him
self 4 will take up the same watchword as he begins the
Galilean ministry. The watchword of Jesus5 was
" believe," it is true, but none the less he took up this
great word of John and passed it on. It was a more
virile word 6 than our translation " repent." It was
really, "Change your mind (life)." We shall need to
return to this word in the next chapter. The call to
repent challenged attention at once. John had the
moral earnestness to demand a new life on the part of
his audience. They listened with respect. But it
was the second part of his proclamation that sent a
thrill through the great crowds. "For the kingdom
» Weiss, "Life of Christ," vol. I, p. 312.
2 Smith, " Days of His Flesh," p. 27.
8 Matt. 3:2. 4 Matt. 4 : 17; Mark 1 : 15.
8 Bruce on Matt. 3:2. ° lieravoeire.

54 JOHN THE LOYAL
of heaven1 is at hand." He mentions this as a rea
son for instant repentance on the part of the people.
The old prophets had urged repentance, but they
had not been able to say that the kingdom of heaven
had come nigh. The Talmud reports the rabbis as
saying: "If Israel would repent but for a single day,
forthwith the Redeemer will come." 2 Now at last
the kingdom, the long-promised kingdom, is hover
ing near. Will the people repent ? How near is the
kingdom? John says literally: "Has drawn near." 3
It is more specious than true to say that John (and
Jesus) felt that the kingdom was still in the future.
Some aspects of the kingdom, the" eschatological
features, were still future. But the more vital and
spiritual phases of the kingdom were felt by both
John and Jesus to be already present. By "king
dom" John means "reign." The "reign of heaven
has drawn near." A fuller treatment of "kingdom"
will come later. Surely the note of warning is here
sounded by John. The day of judgment for Israel
has come. The only hope is in repentance. The
destruction of Jerusalem throws a lurid light back on
John's words. Jesus himself connected that dire ca
lamity with the city's rejection of him.4 What startled
the people was not so much that the day of doom hung
1 Matthew alone has this phrase. Mark and Luke have " Kingdom of
God." Allen (" Commentary on Matthew ") insists on a real difference of
content.' But he is pretty certainly wrong. " Heaven " seems to be " a
reverential substitute of the later Jews for God" (Smith, "Days of His
Flesh," p. 27). Cf. Bruce on Matt. 3: 2; Dalman, "Words of Jesus"
pp. 91 ff.; Lightfoot and Wetstein on Matt. 3 : 2.
2 " Hieros. Taan.," 64, 1. Cf. Lightfoot on Matt. 3 : 2. Quoted bv
Smith, " Days of His Flesh," p. 28,
8 tjyyiKev. Cf. Matt. 26 ; 45 f. 4 Matt. 24 and 25.

CHALLENGE 55
in the background as that the Messianic era had ar
rived.1 The wild delight of Andrew as he ran to
Simon and cried:2 "WTe have found the Messiah,"
helps us to understand the enthusiasm that was cre
ated by the wonderful words of John. Brother would
tell brother what he had heard, neighbor would tell
neighbor this real "news." Old men, like Simeon,
would thank God that they had lived to see this day,
this day so long in coming. They would gather in
groups to talk it over. Each one felt that he must
hear the new prophet for himself. In each heart " the
kingdom of heaven" was interpreted to mean what he
most wished. The rainbow of promise was stretched
over each life. At first the intense curiosity excited
probably served to divert attention from John's stern
call to repent. He was the sensation of the time.3
He was a "phenomenon" in the real sense of that
much-abused term.
6. Jerusalem at John's Feet. — John, like Jeremiah
and Ezekiel, was of a priestly family. But he made
no appeal for more attention to the Levitical rites and
sacrifices. He had caught the spirit of God in Hosea : 4
" I will have mercy, and not sacrifice." This was the
figure of exaggerated contrast to emphasize the supe
riority of the spiritual over the ceremonial. This the
rabbis and priests of Christ's time failed to under
stand. Jesus rebuked them for their ignorance on
1 Nourse. in "Standard Bible Dictionary."
2 John 1 : 41. Eipij/cap.ei' tov Ueaaiav. Cf . 1 : 45, Philip to Nathanael.
8 "John the Baptist, in his manifestation and energy, was like a burning
torch; his public life was quite an earthquake — the whole man was a
sermon" (Lange, "Life of Christ," vol. II, p. 11).
!6:6.

56 JOHN THE LOYAL
this point. "Go ye and learn what this meaneth."
John had learned. He stands out above his time be
cause he had grasped spiritual values.
It perhaps does not seem strange, under all the
circumstances, that great crowds thronged to hear
the Baptist. Twenty thousand people would gather
to hear George Whitfield and be melted to tears.1
The excitable crowds in Palestine "gathered around
Simon, Athronges, and Judas of Galilee, and even
such a miserable impostor as Theudas." 2 Luke
merely speaks of "the multitudes that kept going
forth." 3 Mark notes that " all the country of Judea "
joined in " this exodus to the Jordan." 4 Judea is
personified. A living stream kept going forth5 from
all parts of the country. Matthew notes in particu
lar that "all the region round about Jordan" came.
This was most natural of all. The common peo
ple took John to be a prophet even long after his
death.6 They recognized the genuine7 prophet in
John. All classes came, including the most degraded,
the publicans and harlots.8 These "justified God" 9
because of the moral earnestness of John. " The chief
need of the world is the death-defying courage of true
' Smith, " In the Days of His Flesh." p. 28.
2 Farrar, "Life of Lives," pp. 167 f. "The multitude clung with con
vulsive hope or despairing frenzy to almost anyone who seemed to promise
any form or possibility of emancipation — to Hyrcanus; to the beautiful
young High Priest Aristobulus; to the impostor Alexander; to Agrippa I.;
— some Jews even regarded Herod the Great as a divinely appointed
Deliverer" (ibid.).
8 roiy 7ropevop.(fvoi? oxAois. 4 Swete on Mark 1 : 5.
6 e£ciropeticTo. Descriptive imperfect.
8 Matt. 21 : 26, 32. Hence the rulers are afraid.
' Mark 11 : 32. The word Sitos is added.
8 Luke 7 : 29.
8 iSiKaiaia-av. Took John's side against the Pharisees and lawyers.
Luke 7 : 30.

CHALLENGE 57
men." x The Jewish notion of a prophet was that of
a fearless preacher more than that of a mere seer.2
The truth shines forth from the true prophet as the
light from the sun.3 Josephus4 bears testimony to
the power of John with the people who "came in
crowds about him, for they were very greatly moved
[or pleased] by hearing his words," " for they seemed
ready to do anything he should advise." Herod,
Josephus adds, "feared lest the great influence John
had over the people might put it into his power and
inclination to raise a rebellion." Surely no greater
tribute to the power of John over the people could be
given.5 There was in truth prodigious excitement.
"From the days of John the Baptist until now the
kingdom of heaven suffereth violence and men of
violence take it by force." 6 It is not perfectly clear
what this language of Jesus means, but he seems to
have in mind the intense moral earnestness7 of those
who thronged around John, and later around himself.
In Luke the bold figure is softened a bit,8 and yet each
man has a moral conflict who enters the kingdom.9
" People no longer merely prophesy and dream about
it, but they press to win entrance into it." 10 John
himself was the noblest example of this moral en
thusiasm, and it was contagious.
1 Farrar, "Life of Lives," p. 171.
2 Geike, " Life and Words of Christ," vol. I, p. 393.
8 Clement of Alexandria, Horn, ii, 6.
4 "Ant.," xviii, 5, 2.
8 This testimony of Josephus to John is challenged by some, but on
insufficient grounds. Its bearing on the gospel account of the death of
John comes up later. 6 Matt. 11 : 12.
7 0iifeT<u, Ka\ puurral apwafavoiv avrrjv. 8 tvayy*\i£irai.
9 Luke 16 : 16. 7TM els airrr)v /Siagerat.
io Holtzmann, "Life of Jesus," p. 121.

58 JOHN THE LOYAL
But one must not think that all the people who
came responded rightiy to John's tremendous appeal.
Luke, indeed, represents John as denouncing the
multitudes who came as " offspring of vipers." 1 Mat
thew2 probably more exacdy defines "the Pharisees
and Sadducees" as those to whom this fierce denun
ciation is addressed. But there were probably scof
fers in the crowd then, as now, who shared with the
leaders this hostile attitude toward the new prophet
on the Jordan. "No doubt the effect on many of
the people was superficial, and chiefly associated with
secular conceptions of the Messianic reign. The am
bitious began to dream of place and power ('Who
shall be greatest in the kingdom of heaven?'), the
self-indulgent to cherish hopes that the new king
would ' destroy the law or the prophets,' and give new
laws less severe, the poor to hope for better times
somehow." 3 The effect on most of the crowd was
electric. "Along the mountain terraces and rugged
foot-tracks, the eager surging crowd were asking the
question, What shall we do ? " 4
But the most astonishing thing remains to be dis
cussed. "All they of Jerusalem"5 went forth also.
It was one thing for the Am-ha-aretz, the people from
the county and the provinces, to go out to hear John.
But "conservative, disdainful Jerusalem, slow to be
touched by new popular influences," 6 was quite
another matter. Bruce continues: "The remark
's : 7. ' 3 : 7.
8 John A. Broadus, in manuscript notes on John the Baptist.
4 Reynolds, "John the Baptist," p. 254.
8 Mark 1 : 5. Cf. Matt. 3 : 5.
8 Bruce on Matt. 3 : 5.

CHALLENGE 59
able thing is that any came from that quarter."
Proud, imperious Jerusalem was accustomed to have
pilgrims come to her gates. But now the crowds
swept out of her gates to the wilderness. "What
went ye out into the wilderness to behold ? " J Jesus
will ask. There is fine irony in the question. He
has in mind the point of view of the multitudes, to be
sure, who in light-hearted curiosity tripped out to see
the new sensation. John was anything but a reed
shaken in the wind. He was not clad in soft raiment.
He was a prophet and they were right in that, but he
was a great deal more. He was a man. At bottom
a real man is more than prophet or priest or king.
Probably the people of Jerusalem were simply carried
away with the tide. Many came with an apologetic
air, half ashamed to be caught in such a motley
crowd. But why did the leaders go? John will himself
demand an answer to that very question.2 "Who
warned you to flee from the wrath to come ? " Doubt
less they had come from no such motive. For one
thing they wished to see what there was in this new
prophet. They followed the crowd, which had left
Jerusalem. They may have argued that they were
responsible for the guidance of the people. In time3
the Sanhedrin will come to take the work of John
seriously as we shall see. They will be driven to it
by the popular tide. But, at any rate, the religious
teachers of the time are spectators in the prophet's
great throng. The religious capital of Judea is no
1 Matt. 11:7; Luke 7: 24. 2 Matt. 3:7. »Johnl:19ff.

CO JOHN THE LOYAL
longer Jerusalem, but for the moment with John.
His sceptre is his voice, and with it he sways the
multitude. Perhaps at first the leaders did not comprehend
John. They were dazed and even for a time charmed
by his power. Jesus later reminded the Jerusalem
leaders of this fact. "Ye were willing to rejoice for
a season in his light." x John was the popular idol
and the leaders fell in with the drift of opinion. John
had his "hour" 2 of glory even with the ecclesiastical
authorities. Jesus reminds them also of the formal
embassy3 from the Sanhedrin. They were probably
ashamed of that moment of weakness. But, before
John had opened fire upon them, they basked in the
light of his fame and power. Many a new pastor has
John's experience. At first he is the lion of the town,
the hero of the hour, but the tide turns against him
and the powerful friends drop away. It was really
"exulting joy" that the Jerusalem leaders once had
in John.4 There was in truth light enough in John
for even Jerusalem to enjoy, if only Jerusalem had
eyes to see. "He was the lamp that burneth and
shineth." 5 Out in the wilderness this light blazed
till it was seen in Jerusalem. It burned on after his
death, burns, indeed, to-day. There was both heat
and light in John. The impression on the rulers was
temporary, but his light in the world of truth will
never go out.
1 John 5 : 35. 2 wpos Upav.
8 John 5 : 33, &iretrra\KaTe. It was still a fact.
4 Cf. Westcott on John 5 : 35, AyaWiadyvai.
8 John 5 : 35, 6 Av^vos 6 xaiiSfxevoc koX ipaiviav.

CHALLENGE 61
7. The Sins of the People Laid Bare. — Luke1 has
preserved a specimen of John's preaching that goes
far to explain the wonderful effect of his ministry.
On two short pages can be printed all that has been
preserved of the words of John. Luke is familiar with
the fact that John made many other exhortations.2
He probably had reports of some of them, and made
these brief extracts as justly reflecting the style and
temper of the man. They do this with remarkable
effectiveness. There can be no doubt of the genuine
ness of these fragments. They ring true and fairly
tingle with life and power. They are in reality words
that breathe and burn. He preached "the good
tidings unto the people," 3 but he did not confine him
self to one particular line.4 John challenged the life
of the people along the whole line of its mere cere
monialism, its indifference to real religion, its corrup
tion. He was a reformer, but more. With a proph
et's tongue he lashed the sins of those in high stations
as well as in low.
One day, when John had spoken with unusual
vehemence and power, the multitudes5 began to ask:6
"What then must7 we do?" The "then" (ovv)
points back to John's indictment. His words had cut
1 3 : 10-14. Not in Matthew, but still probably from Q (the logia),
unless, indeed, there was a special document with sayings of the Baptist.
2 3 : 18. iroAAd «u Irepa rather implies that they were not all just like
these. 8 evTr/yektieTo. In Luke 3 : l&note ekeyxop-evos. He exhorted, he preached
the good tidings, he reproved.
4 napaKakuv, in Luke 3 : 18, is a difficult word to translate. It means,
literally, to call to one's side (irapa).
6 oi ox^ot. The plural shows how great the throngs were.
8 i-rnipmrmv (3 : 10). Inchoative imperfect. Plummer takes it as repe
tition. 7 votyo-ianev. Deliberative subjunctive.

62 JOHN THE LOYAL
to the quick. This "Incarnate Conscience" had
reached the conscience of his hearers. That is a
great moment in the preacher's life when he is called
on to speak straight to the sin-smitten and conscience-
stricken soul. But one must be sure not to misun
derstand John's reply. He assumes that his hearers
understand his teaching about repentance and the
kingdom. The practical reply given about generosity
is not to take the place of the grace of repentance, but
is to be a proof of it. The same point applies to his
reply to the publicans and the soldiers who likewise
asked what they must do. It is reformation that John
here demands as proof of repentance. He put his
finger upon the besetting ein of each class that came
before him. But John did not hesitate a moment to
lay bare the sin that needed exposure. It was ex
tortion with the publicans, violence and oppression
with the soldiers. Travellers frequently wore two un
dergarments.1 It is one of these that John suggests
may be given to him who has none. The starving
man is not to be left without help.2 The publicans3
were thoroughly detested by the Jews "as blood
suckers for a heathen conqueror." 4 Zacchseus ad
mitted that he had robbed the people.5 Those who
collected for Herod Antipas were as much disliked as
those who collected for Caesar.6 The soldiers were
probably Jewish soldiers who .may have been acting
i Xiti5v, not lp.anov (the outer garment).
2 Cf. the conduct of the priest and the Levite in the parable of the Good
Samaritan (Luke 10 : 30-37). Cf. I Thess. 2 : 8.
8 rekmvai are publicani.
4 Plummer on Luke, p. 91.
8 Luke 19 : 8. « Matt. 9 : 9 ff.

CHALLENGE 63
as police to assist the tax-collectors.1 But intimida
tion ("do violence to no man" 2) and false accusation
("neither exact anything wrongfully," marg. "ac
cuse" 3) were just the crimes that soldiers would be
guilty of. Soldiers are notoriously prone to discontent
with their wages.4 John does not denounce the call
ing of publican and soldier per se. Taxes have to be
collected. Soldiers have to defend their country so
long as the horror of war exists. But he demanded
morality in these men.
8. Exposure of the Religious Teachers. — Matthew5
. and Luke8 both report this fragment of John's preach
ing. There may have been a document about John's
ministry, or the original, virile preaching of John may
have been handed down from mouth to mouth.
Matthew is more specific than Luke in mentioning
"many of the Pharisees and Sadducees" who came.
These two religious parties disliked one another very
much, but they are both deserving of John's condemna
tion.7 They will later be found working hand in
hand to compass the death of Jesus. For the moment
they bury their theological differences and rivalry for
place and power in the common curiosity about John.8
1 o-TpaTevd>evou Cf. Plummer, in loco. Schuerer thinks that they were
heathen soldiers.
2 uriSiva Suureiarpre. The aor. subj. with ulj puts the matter delicately
as if they were not yet guilty. Cf. Ill Mace. 3 : 21 for this verb with the
sense of extortion.
8 o-v/co^oiTijmrre. Etymologically, "show figs by shaking the tree"
(Plummer). The false accuser who wishes to obtain money. Cf. Zac-
chseus, in Luke 19 : 8, who uses this word of himself.
4 biptoviois equals "rations" (bipov, aviofiai). 5 3 : 7-10. • 3 : 7-9.
' The single article rav, in Matt. 3 : 7, treats both classes as one.
8 For discussion of the Pharisees and Sadducees, see Wellhausen, " Die
Pharisaerund die Sadducaer; Schuerer," second division, vol. II, pp. 1-43
(where see Bibliography); Edersheim, "Life and Times of Jesus," vol. I,
pp. 93 ff.; Broadus, "Commentary on Matthew," pp. 44 ff., etc.

64 JOHN THE LOYAL
"The formal piety of the Pharisees and the self-
indulgent scepticism of the Sadducees would be
equally hateful to him, and he meets them with in
dignant surprise." J Indeed, his sensitive spirit was
troubled by their presence as is often the case with
sincere natures like John. They instinctively recoil
from such duplicity and craftiness as is seen in the
Pharisees and Sadducees.2 John himself was of
priestly stock like the Sadducees; but he made no
claims to recognition on that score. Some have won
dered how John would know these pious ecclesiastics
in the great crowds. He could tell partly by their
dress, partly by their conduct, and partly by an in
stinctive feeling of hostility. It was John's business
to know the life of his time which he had arraigned.
He was no recluse in the sense that he held himself
aloof from the currents of thought and shut his eyes
to what was going on before him. He may have felt
that these dignitaries had come to lay hands on him.3
The authorities in Jerusalem may have wished to get
control 4 of the movement, having sent deputies to
spy upon it and report. Such an embassy was sent
to John from Jerusalem according to the Fourth
Gospel, though probably not at the time of this dis
course.5 However, it must be remembered that these
fragments in Matthew and Luke have no notes of
1 Plummer on Matthew, p. 2? .
2 Bruce on Matthew, p. 82. » Plummer, "Matthew," p. 27.
4 Smith, "In the Days of His Flesh," p. 29. But Keim ("Jesus of
Nazara," vol. II, p. 264) thinks that the hierarchy kept very quiet be
fore John.
8 Keim ("Jesus of Nazara," vol. II, p. 265) denies the value of the
Fourth Gospel because the other gospels do not give it. But Matthew
certainly shows that it was possible.

CHALLENGE 65
time at all save that it was during the six months
before the baptism of Jesus.
John does not fear the religious leaders of the time.
He turns on them with an indignant question: "Ye
offspring of vipers, who warned you to flee from the
wrath to come ? " The point of the figure lies in the
" fleeing," not in calling them " offspring of vipers." x
Often John had seen the vipers run before the blaz
ing dry-scrub2 (like a prairie fire) as before the burn
ing stubble in preparation for sowing.3 There was a
touch of grim humor4 in the picture as well as of
scorn. " The wrath to come " was judgment on Israel.
The rabbis held that the judgment foretold as con
nected with the Messianic Dispensation was to be
upon the heathen, but John saw that it was to include
the Jews also.5 How clear the content or nature of
this judgment was to John's mind we do not know.
But the destruction of Jerusalem is a natural fulfil
ment which itself is a type of the final judgment.8
But it is not possible to soften the sting in the expres
sion " offspring of vipers." 7 Jesus will twice use it
concerning the Pharisees.8 " These serpent-like char
acters" are "the crooked" 9 of Isaiah. John caught
the metaphor fresh from the life of the wilderness and
hurled it in the faces of the professional religionists of
Jerusalem. It stung like the tail of a whip.
1 Bruce on Matthew, p. 82.
2 G. A. Smith, " Historical Geography of Palestine," p. 495.
8 Furrer, "Zeitschrift fllr Miss. und. Rel.," 1890.
4 Bruce on Matthew, p. 82.
8 Plummer on Luke, p. 89. Cf. Joel 2 : 31; Mal. 3:2; 4:1; Isa. 13 : 9.
6 Plummer, ibid.
7 yevrqiLara exiSvuv, broods of snakes. 8 Matt. 12 : 34; 23 : 33.
9 o-Kokid (Isa. 40 : 4 f.). Cf. Plummer, "Luke," p. 89.

66 JOHN THE LOYAL
John is not entirely hopeless of the Pharisees and
Sadducees, unlikely pupils as they are. There is an
innuendo at their insincerity and hypocrisy.1 They
had heard John's word about repentance. John does
not say that they must reform in order to repent.
The Pharisees and Sadducees must prove their re
pentance by their life. That is true of all as a matter
of fact, but John singles them out in this demand be
cause of their prominence and their duplicity. It was
virtually saying that in the eyes of men they were
under suspicion. It was the appeal to life that was
later made by Jesus,2 by James,3 by Paul,4 by Peter,5
by John the Apostle.6
The Baptist shows a masterful comprehension of
the mental processes of the Pharisees and Sadducees.
They would fall back upon privilege and station.
Racial and ecclesiastical pride were combined in the
Jew. John shows his knowledge of current rabbin-
ism by this protest. The rabbis made much of the
"merits of the fathers" and in particular of Abraham.
Edersheim7 has brought together an interesting set
of quotations from the Talmud on the subject. The
rain fell because of the merit of Abraham; the ships
on the sea were preserved because of him; because of
Abraham Moses received the law; for his sake Daniel
was heard; for his sake every Israelite will have part
in the world to come. John's stern rebuke against
all the traditional nonsense was a reaffirmation of the
1 Plummer on Matthew, p. 28; Bruce on Matthew, p. 83.
2 Sermon on the Mount. a Epistle.
4 Rom. 6-8; Gal. 4 and 5. 8 Epistles. 8 I John.
7 "Life and Times of Jesus," vol. I, pp. 271 f.

CHALLENGE 67
eternal moral law.1 He passed by all the myriad
pettifogging rules and punctilios of the Pharisees and
called them to a sense of their personal relation to
God. Like the snail in the Hindoo proverb which
sees nothing but its own shell and thinks it the
grandest place in the universe,2 so these self-satisfied
Jews made continual boast of descent from Abraham.3
It is probably true that the horizon of John the Bap
tist was narrower than that of Paul, but Paul himself
never saw more clearly the distinction between the
merely ceremonial and the spiritual and moral than
did John on this occasion. Jesus, Stephen, Paul were
all to sound this same note and meet the bitter hos
tility of the Pharisees.4 There is a slight variation in
Matthew's report of John's protest and that of Luke.
Matthew says "Think not"; 5 Luke has " Begin not" 6
to say. But the difference is merely verbal. One
forbids the beginning of the utterance, the other the
thought behind the utterance.
John leaves the Pharisees and Sadducees with a
warning. "Even now is the axe laid unto the root
of the trees." 7 The axe is then ready for use. The
point lies in the "even now" (already), little as they
think so. The axe is invisible (to them), but it is
there. All that is needed is for the woodman to lift

¦ Farrar, "Life of Lives," p. 173. 2 Ibid., p. 172.
'Cf. Josephus, "Ant.," iii, 5, 3; II Esdr. 6:56 ff.; Josh. 8:33, 53;
James, 2:21; Wetstein on Matt. 3 : 9.
4 Cf. Reynolds, "John the Baptist," pp. 253 f.
• p-ij boirfre kiyeiv. Moulton (" Prolegomena," p. 15) thinks that Luke
made a deliberate improvement of the Aramaic original.
8 p.r] ap£r)tr&e keyeiv.
7 jgv a  xelrai (Matt. 3 : 10). The two emphatic words are furthest
apart. Kelrai is used as the perfect passive of rifri\p.i.

68 JOHN THE LOYAL
the axe and cut the tree. The chief value of a tree
(olive or fig, for instance) in the East is the fruit which
it bears. Jesus used the figure of the barren fig-tree
to the same purpose.1 The woodman had come and
waited a little in hope of still obtaining fruit from the
tree that merely cumbered the ground. The point is
really the same as the demand for "fruits worthy of
repentance." When it is clear that no fruit will be
borne, the axe will fall. John has issued his challenge
to the people at large, to the various classes in society,
in particular to the religious leaders. The heart of
his cry was for real manhood. He recoiled from the
hollow shams in religion and society. "We know
Diogenes went through the streets of Athens with
a lantern, seeking for a man; and when some of
the crowd came to him he beat them away with the
contemptuous exclamation, 'I want men; ye are2
o-icvBaXa.' " 3
"God give us men! A time like this demands
Great hearts, strong minds, true faith, and willing hands;
Men whom the lust of office does not kill,
Men whom the spoils of office cannot buy,
Men who possess conviction and a will,
Men who have honour, men who dare not lie."
1 Luke 13 : 6-9.
2 o-Kvflaka equals rubbish. Cf. Phil. 3 : 8.
8 Farrar, "Life of Lives," pp. 171 f.

CHAPTER III
REMEDY
"Preaching the baptism of repentance unto remission
of sins" (Luke 3 : 3).
1. John Not a Mere Iconoclast. — One quite misses
the force of John's mission who sees in him only the
iconoclast. He was that as was Jesus when he ap
pears in the temple at the beginning of his ministry
as reported in the Fourth Gospel.1 Geike2 fails to
grasp the fulness of John's message when he says:
" He came to throw down, not to build; to startle, not
to instruct; to use the axe, not the trowel." It is
true that John made no breach with the law per se.
He taught his disciples to fast as a regular observance
much after the fashion of the Pharisees.3 "The dis
ciples of John fast often, and make supplications." 4
This praying, while spiritual in essence, probably
conformed to the Jewish forms. John taught his
disciples to pray.5 The point to emphasize is that he
had a positive programme to present to the people
besides denunciation of their sins. The prophets of
the Old Testament held out the promise of pardon as
well as rebuke, "the flame which consumes and the
light which consoles." 6 And John was the light that
1 2 : 13-22.
2 " Life and Words of Christ," vol. I, p. 394.
8 Mark 2: 18. 4 Luke 5: 33. . • Luke 11:1.
6 Farrar, "Life of Christ," vol. I, p. 114.
69

70 JOHN THE LOYAL
burns and shines.1 He did not come to organize a
new sect or separate community.2 He may have had
a special band of devoted followers gathered round
him as Jesus had the twelve apostles,3 but we do not
know it to be true. We do know that disciples of
John apparently lingered as a separate body long after
his death.4 We are justified in thinking that this was
not in accordance with John's wish and plan.5 Their
loyalty to John in his trouble and death was beautiful,6
but John rejoiced to see his disciples follow Jesus.7
We know even from Josephus8 that John " urged the
Jews who were willing to live worthily, and to show
uprightness one to another, and piety toward God, to
be baptized." He did more than that, as we learn
from the Fourth Gospel.9 "There came a man, sent
from God, whose name was John. The same came
for witness, that he might bear witness of the light,
that all might believe through him." What calls for
comment in this passage is "that all might believe
through10 him." He was the intermediary who was
to lead men to faith in the real light, which John saw
and others did not. That was the heart of John's
message. 2. Submission to the Reign of God. — This point is
more implied than expressed in the brief words pre
served to us in the gospel. John witnessed, as we
have just seen, " that men might believe through him."
1 John 5 : 35.
2 Weiss, "Life of Christ," vol. I, p. 314.
8 Geike, "Life and Words of Christ," vol. I, p. 407. Weiss "Life of
Christ," vol. I, p. 314. 4 Acts 19 : 1-7.
b John 3 : 26-30. 8 Matt. 14 : 12. i John 3 : 28 f .
8 " Ant.," xviii, 5, 2. 9Johnl:6f. "> 6V airoO.

REMEDY 71
Believe what or whom? Paul explains in Acts1 to
some lingering, ill-informed disciples of John that
John taught the people " that they should believe on
him that should come after him, that is on Jesus."
The element of faith, therefore, belonged to John's
preaching. Edersheim2 sees this clearly. " He came
to call Israel to submit to the reign of God, about to
be manifested in Christ." That was the goal before
John. The term "kingdom" was by no means new
in Jewish terminology. It has its roots in the pro
phetic writings,3 in the righteous king of Isaiah4 and
Micah,5 in the Davidic dynasty of Jeremiah6 and
Ezekiel.7 In Psalm 89 the promise made to David 8
is expounded in language akin to that used by Jesus
later.9 Zacharias had heard the angel tell of John's
mission "to make ready for the Lord a people pre
pared for him." 10 The people who followed Jesus to
Jerusalem, and who "supposed that the kingdom of
God was immediately to appear," " looked for some
spectacular apocalyptic demonstration. But there were
some of the Jews like Joseph of Arimathea "who
was looking for the kingdom of God." 12 So, likewise,
Simeon and Anna caught the vision of the spiritual
nature of the kingdom. The one was "looking for
the consolation of Israel," a the other " spoke of him
1 19 : 4.
2 " Life and Times of Jesus," vol. I, p. 270.
8 Broad us, " Commentary on Matthew," p. 35.
4 9 : 6, 7; 11 : 1-10.
8 4 : 1-8. 8 23 : 5, 5. ' 37 : 24. 8 II Sam. 7 : 13, 16.
8 Matt. 16 : 18 f.; oiicoSo/u-ijo-w is used in II Sam. 7 : 13, 16; in Ps. 89 : 4; in
Matt. 16: 18. The figure of "house" is used as tantamount to "king
dom" (Hebrews 3 : 5 f.). 10 Luke 1:17. "Luke 19: 11.
12 Luke 23 : 51, irpoo-e8e'xeTo (imperfect and so durative).
» Luke 2 : 25.

72 JOHN THE LOYAL
to all them that were looking for the redemption of
Jerusalem." J It is quite gratuitous, therefore, to
deny to John any comprehension of the spiritual as
pects of this great word. He does use apocalyptic
imagery more or less in accord with the ideas of the
time. "The Jewish expectation was fantastic and
superstitious" 2 on the point of the literal return of
Elijah. But John the Baptist rose above that idea.3
This matter of the apocalyptic language and hopes is
one keenly debated at present. Schweitzer4 seeks to
explain thus the whole content of the term " kingdom"
in the gospels. It is, with him, all futuristic and cata
clysmic. "The futuristic aspect of the kingdom was
certainly present to the mind of Jesus," 5 but that is
not saying that there was no other idea in the mind of
Jesus. John caught the prophetic spirit of judgment
for sin, and set that forth in apocalyptic language (as
did Jesus).6 Some have gone to the utmost extreme
and have denied that John the Baptist was able to
understand or believe in the spiritual sense of the
kingdom as preached by Jesus.7 It is clear that with
Jesus the term kingdom was used in various senses.
In the 119 passages in the New Testament where the
word kingdom occurs, Edersheim8 finds 34 where the
» Luke 2 : 38.
2 Sanday, " The Life of Christ in Recent Research," p. 33.
8 John 1 : 21 f.
4 "The Quest of the Historical Jesus" (1910).
8 Muirhead, "The Eschatology of Jesus," p. 85. For the ideas of the
Jews, see the " Apocalypse of Baruch," lxxii, 4-6; " Assumption of Moses "
x, 7-10.
8 Burkitt, "The Eschatological Idea in the Gospel" (" Cambridge Bibl.
Essays"), p. 204.
7 Schweitzer, " Quest of the Historical Jesus," p. 205.
8 "Life and Times of Jesus," vol. I, p. 270. See further, Dobschutz.
"Eschatology of the Gospels" (1910).

REMEDY 73
idea is simply the rule of God, 17 where this rule of
God is manifested in and through Christ, and one of
these is Matt. 3 : 2, where the term is put into the
mouth of the Baptist. The other passages tell how
the kingdom of God is gradually developed, how it is
triumphant at the second coming of Christ, how it is
consummated in the world to come. Plummer1 makes
the point that Jesus gives no definition of the kingdom
and that no definition can be made that is not partial
and that does not leave out part of the truth. The
"reign of God" is viewed now from one point of view,
now from another. But when John the Baptist said:
" The kingdom of heaven has drawn near," he had in
mind the Messiah. He saw and described the Mes
siah as one who would baptize with the Holy Ghost.2
It is thus beyond doubt that John had a clear grasp of
the spiritual aspects of the kingdom of God, of the
personal relation of each soul with God. The fore
most thing in his programme was just this personal
adjustment with God. He wished to prevent, if pos
sible, the bursting of the cloud of divine wrath upon
the Jewish people. That catastrophe could only be
turned aside by the genuine conversion of the people
as individuals brought face to face with God. Holtz
mann3 puts it well: "He is not content that they
should merely gaze upon him with wondering curios
ity; to every one who comes out to him must be com
municated the same anxiety which has driven him
self out into the desert."
1 On Matthew, p. 25.
2 Mark 1:8; Matt. 3:11; Luke 3 : IS.
• '!Life of Jesus," p. 118.

74 JOHN THE LOYAL
3. Repentance. — This is John's great word,1 and it
is to-day a wofully misunderstood word. The trouble
is not with the Greek2 word. That is plain enough.
In its etymological sense we have the substantive3 in
Heb. 12 : 17, "for he found no place for a change of
mind in his father." Elsewhere in the New Testa
ment it has a moral quality. In Rev. 2 : 5 and 3 : 3
it is associated with memory.4 The word in itself does
not mean sorrow for sin, though that is, of course, in
volved. Another word 5 was used for that. Sorrow
may bring about repentance,6 and "godly sorrow"
always does.7 And contemplation of the goodness of
God always leads to repentance.8 Jesus came to call
sinners to repentance.9 It was directed toward God.10
It is coupled with belief u and with conversion.12 It is
the trait in a sinner that causes joy in heaven.13 It is
essential to salvation.14 It was commanded by Jesus15
and by God.16 It was a fundamental doctrine in the
apostolic preaching.17 Proof of repentance was de
manded,18 as was true of John the Baptist's preaching.19
So far so good. All the witnesses testify that John
associated repentance with baptism.20 Mark calls it
1 Bruce on Matthew, p. 79.
2 p.eravoiu. Matt. 3:2. 8 fieravoia.
4 pLirquoveve Ovv  Kai p.erai'dijcrov.
8 fierapiikouai. Cf. Matt. 21 : 30; 27:3; II Cor. 7 : 8.
8 ikviry&ryre eis pxravaiav , II Cor. 7 : 9.
' II Cor. 7 : 10, ij Kara debv \vir>|. 8 Rom. 2 : 4.
8 Luke 5 : 32. .
10 Acts 20 : 21, eis #e6V.
11 Mark 1 : 15, p.eravoeiTe Kai mo-revere.
12 iirio-rpetpji irpos oe keyuv Meravoib. Luke 17 : 4.
|8 Luke 15 : 7, 10. ejrl ei»i ajuapraAip iteravovvri.
14 Luke 13 : 3, 5.' « Matt. 4 : 17. " Acts 17 : 30- 26 • 20
« Mark 6 : 12; Acts 24 : 47; Heb. 6:1.
¦8 Acts 26 : 20. u Matt. 3:8; Luke 3 : 8.
20 1:4. ponrio-p-a iimnuK equals "repentance (kind of) baptism." The
genitive case is the case of genus, kind, and describes the baptism.

REMEDY 75
"the baptism of repentance." Thus the relation is
described by Luke1 and Paul in Acts.2 Matthew3
uses another expression which is not clear in itself.
The preposition eis here used is employed in Matt.
12 : 41 in connection with the repentance of the peo
ple of Nineveh, who "repented at the preaching of
Jonah."4 Hence Plummer5 is justified in saying:
"The repentance precedes the baptism, which seals
it and reminds the baptized of his new obligations."
Josephus6 has this notion of John's teaching also.
He says that John baptized " supposing still that the
soul was thoroughly purified beforehand by righteous
ness." Repentance in the New Testament leads to
forgiveness of sins and life.7 It opens the door to full
knowledge of the truth.8
The prophets of old were fond of sounding the note
of repentance.9 It is unfortunate that the English
word "repent," from a Latin (late) compound, re-
poenitere (cf. poenitet me) means to be sorry again.
But the word is now so deeply rooted in English the
ology, literature and life that it is practically impos
sible to drop it. But one must never forget that John
the Baptist did not urge men merely to be sorry, but
to change their course of life. Indeed, " conversion " 10
is far more in accord with the real meaning of this
word than "repentance." Least of all must it be
13:3. 213:24; 19:4.
3 3 : 11 (cf. Acts 2 : 38), eis p-eTeu-oiai*.
4 perevoi\o-av els to KT)pvyp.a 'Icova. B On Luke, p. 86.
8 " Ant.," xviii, 5, 2.
7 Acts 15 : 31; 11:18; Luke 24 : 47. 8 II Tim. 2 : 25.
2 Isa. 1:16, 17; 55:7; Jer. 7:3, 7; Ezek. 18:19-32; 36:26-27;
Joel 2 : 12, 13; Micah 6 : 8; Zech. 1 : 34.
« Stalker, "The Two St. Johns," p. 207.

76 JOHN THE LOYAL
imagined that the Baptist exhorted people to "do
penance," as the Roman Catholic Vulgate has it.1
John would be horrified beyond measure to find his
trumpet-call for spiritual renewal turned into mediaeval
notions of earning salvation by paying money for it.2
4. Remission of Sins.3 — It is not possible to treat
these spiritual processes in natural order without en
tering the realm of controversy. Bruce4 is not willing
to admit that baptism is essential to forgiveness in
John's teaching, though Plummer on Matthew5 holds
with Tertullian and Cyril of Jerusalem that baptism
"bestows" forgiveness of sins. But Plummer6 on
Luke had taken the evangelical interpretation that
the purpose was subjective, "assuring the penitent of
forgiveness, and of deliverance from the burden,
penalty, and bondage of sin"; Bruce7 further refuses
to consider "confession" as prerequisite to baptism.
Broadus8 sees that forgiveness is promised on condi
tion of confession,9 "though of course this is not the
meritorious ground of forgiveness." Logically, and
as a matter of fact, forgiveness or remission of sins
turns fundamentally on the attitude of the heart
toward God. When one comes to confession, he
comes to see that his sins are already forgiven. It is
a fine point and not to be pressed too far. A man
who claimed forgiveness and yet refused confession
and baptism justifies doubt of his forgiveness.
1 " Poenitentiam agite."
2 Cf . Broadus on Matthew, pp. 34 f.
8 dipe<ris ap.apriibv, Mark 1:4; Luke 3 : 3.
4 On Mark, p. 342.
6 P- 22. « P. 86. i On Matthew, p. 81.
8 " Commentary on Matthew," p. 44.
9 Prov. 28: 13; I John 1:9.

REMEDY 77
The term "forgiveness" or "remission" l is a beau
tiful word. God sends the sins away, out of sight, out
of mind. It is objected that the Baptist was a poor
theologian and had no doctrinal system, that, in a
word, he knew nothing of the mediatorial work of
Christ, that his notion of remission of sins was purely
sacramental. It is easy to cite his great cry in John
1 : 29: "Behold the Lamb of God, that taketh away
the sin of the world." 2 It is not necessary, in taking
this to be a genuine logion of the Baptist, to attribute
to him a theory of the atonement. John was doubtless
familiar with Isa. 53 and its Messianic application.
"There can be no doubt that the image is directly
derived from Isa. 53:7 (cf. Acts 8:2)."3 Why
should not he have been familiar with the Paschal
Lamb, since he was of priestly stock ? He spoke this
word after the baptism of Jesus, and in his moment
of rapture at the fresh sight of the Messiah he gave
expression to his deepest word about him. It is not
necessary to explain this as an invention of the author
of the Fourth Gospel dramatically put into the Bap
tist's mouth. It is "the sin of the world" in its col
lective aspect that John has in mind. But this work
of Jesus as the Sin-Bearer makes possible, in John's
view, the remission of sins in the case of the man who
repents and turns to God. Thus John's theological
stand-point does not differ greatly from that of the
New Testament as a whole. We must remember
also that we have only fragments of John's teaching.
1 o^eo-is from iiplrip.1 equals send away.
2 "Io*e 6 ap.vbs tou &eov 6 alpiav ir\v ap.apriav Tou k6o-[10v.
» Westcott on John, vol. I, p. 39.

78 JOHN THE LOYAL
The wonder is that we can piece out any system
at all.
5. Confession. — This act was commanded by the
Mosaic law.1 It was often practised by the penitent.2
It is public confession that is here meant by Matthew3
and Mark.4 Private confession to God is, of course,
essential to salvation and is, in fact, done when one
turns to God with a repentant heart. The case of
the publican at worship is in point.5 This public
confession of sins by individuals was a new thing in
Israel.6 There had been, of course, collective con
fession like that on the Day of Atonement. " It must
have been a stirring sight," Bruce adds, this breaking
down of hearts before God and men. It is the great
est sight in all the world to see men coming out on
the Lord's side. Confession followed as a matter of
course when one had trusted God for his salvation.7
Indeed, the act of baptism was itself 8 a confession of
faith in the good news of the kingdom.
6. Baptism.— John's title, "the Baptist," shows
how people regarded his baptism. The angel Gabriel
had not said that he would have such a " nickname."
He is not always so called. John was still his name
and enough |of itself.9 Mark10 probably gives the
original form of the expression "John the man who
'Lev. 5:5; 16:21, etc.
2 Cf. Broadus on Matthew, p. 44; Ps. 32 : 5; Acts 19 : 18.
8 3 : 6, i(op.okoyovpevoi. The e£ shows that it was a full and frank con
fession. 4 1 : 5.
6 Luke 18 : 13, ftoi r$ ajuapruAip.
8 Bruce on Matthew, p. 81. 7 cf. Rom. 10 : 8 ff
8 Broadus on Matthew, p. 44; Kohler, Johannes der Taufer "
' Cf. Matt. 3 : 13 f.; Mark 1 : 9; Luke 3 : 2, 15; John 1 : 6, etc.
10 6 pairri£biv.

REMEDY 79
baptizes." That is probably the way people first
began to speak of him. But it was easy to fasten upon
him the epithet "the Baptist," as we find it1 so fre
quently. Jesus himself2 is quoted as calling John
"the Baptist." Josephus3 also so describes him.
Matthew applies the term to John more often than
the other gospels, but he does not always do so.4 But
John was also called a prophet5 and teacher.6 Hence
he was not regarded as a mere ceremonialist. The
novelty of his rite attracted attention, and it was easy
for the title to arise. But with John the ordinance
was secondary. The spiritual reality was first in his
mind and in his message. There is danger to-day
that John's striking ceremony in the Jordan may
make some men misunderstand him and his mission.
What was the origin of John's baptism ? The very
title "the Baptist" argues the originality of John's
baptism in some sense. Certainly it was new in its
application.7 The committee from Jerusalem were
astonished that John should baptize8 if he did not
claim to be the Messiah nor Elias nor the prophet.
There is no passage in the Old Testament that fore
tells baptism by these men.9 The point of the ques
tion is that the Messiah would cause no astonishment
if he were to introduce a new rite like this. But if

1 b Pa-irrurrrjs. * Matt. 11 : 11 f.
3 " Ant.," xviii, 5, 2, laawov tow i-niKakovpAvov panno-rov.
4 Cf. Matt. 9 : 14; 21 : 25 ff.
8 Matt. 11:9; 21: 26. « Luke 5: 12.
7 Edersheim, "Life and Times of Jesus," vol. I, p. 273.
8 « oSV fiawri(eis; John 1 : 25.
9 Westcott on John, in loco, quotes Ezek. 36 : 25; Isa. 52 : 15; Zech.
13 : 1 for the notion of a Messianic "lustration." But no reference is here
made to baptism.

80 JOHN THE LOYAL
John is nobody in particular, why had he done it?
The question argues the novelty of John's baptism.
To the same effect is the question of Jesus when he
gave the rulers the dilemma about John's baptism:
"The baptism of John, whence was it? Was it
from heaven or from men?" x Jesus clearly implies
that John's baptism had more than a mere human
origin. " John came unto you in the way of righteous
ness and ye received him not." 2 But we are not to
insist that ceremonial ablution was a new thing in
the world. The Hindoo worship consists largely in
lustral rites, the Greeks had their mystical lustra
tions, and the Romans had the custom of dipping the
head in the Tiber to cleanse from sin.3 The Jews
had "divers baptisms"4 and ceremonial ablutions.5
"Those who had contracted Levitical defilement
were to immerse before offering sacrifice." 6 " He
that washeth7 himself because of a dead body, if he
touch it again, what availeth his washing ? " 8 The
Pharisee, who invited Jesus to breakfast with him,9
"marvelled that he had not first bathed himself be
fore breakfast." 10 Some scholars think that the Jew
ish " proselyte baptism," about which so much is said
in the Talmud, was already in existence before the
time of John.11 There is no doubt whatever of the
1 Matt. 21 : 25. 2 Matt. 21 : 32.
3 Reynolds, "John the Baptist," pp. 277 f.
4 Situpopot? paimopols. Heb. 9: M. E Cf . Lev. 11-15; Num. 19.
6 Edersheim, "Life and Times of Jesus," vol. I, p. 273.
7 fiaim^op.ci'os. 8 Sirach, xxxiv, 25. 9 Sn-ws apiorijotf.
»° Luke 11: 38. efiaimViJi!.
11 Cf- in favor of the early origin of proselyte baptism, Schuerer, "Jew
ish People," etc., second division, II. pp. 319 ff.; Lambert, " Hastings's
D. C. G." Edersheim, " Life and Times of Jesus," vol. I, pp. 273 f . ; vol. II,
Appendix XII. Against this view, see Godet, "Luke," p. 110; Bruce,
"Matthew," p. 79; Broadus, "Matthew," pp. 41 f.

REMEDY 81
existence of "proselyte baptism" from A. D. 200 on
ward. Edersheim1 quotes a remarkable passage from
the Talmud: "To a man who has in his hand a
defiling reptile, who, even if he immerses in all the
waters of the world, his baptism avails him nothing;
but let him cast it from his hand, and if he immerses
in only forty seah of water, immediately his baptism
avails him." But we do not feel sure that this prose
lyte baptism existed before the time of John. There
is nothing quoted from the Talmud to prove it. The
dispute alleged to have existed between the schools of
Hillel and JSchammai rests on precarious evidence.2
Arrian may allude to it.3 If so, the proselyte baptism
existed in the first half of the second century A. D.
In itself there is no real objection from any stand
point to the idea that John was familiar with proselyte
baptism. It was wholly new in Israel for a prophet
like John to call for wholesale baptisms on the part
of the people in proof of a spiritual and moral revolu
tion. It was, indeed, a new ordinance, equivalent to
a vow, and essentially different from the ceremonial
washings with which the Jews were familiar.4 If the
people were familiar with proselyte baptism, then
John was treating the Jews themselves, as heathen in
calling them to submit to a rite which they required of
proselytes from pagan peoples.5 The heathen were
unclean per se, and this is an argument used for the
» " Life and Times of Jesus," vol. I, p. 273.
2 Edersheim, " Life and Times of Jesus," vol. II, p. 747.
8 "Dissert. Epicteti," ii, 9, in tou SeSoweVov koX jjprnievov as a descrip
tion of one called "Jew."
4 Holtzmann, "Life of Jesus," p. 119.
5 Geike, "Life and Words of Christ," vol. I, p. 396.

82 JOHN THE LOYAL
early existence of proselyte baptism. The case of
Naaman, who dipped himself x seven times in the
Jordan, is not exactly parallel, as this was not an
ordinance. Besides the Pharisees and the Essenes,
who practised such frequent ablutions, there was the
sect of the Sabeans, who practised immersions.2 But
there was something about the rite of John that was
new and wonderful, whatever historical antecedents
existed. In a real and true sense his baptism was of
God, and it summoned the people to their knees in
repentance. There was the hush of reverence in the
great crowds when John stepped into the Jordan.
What was the significance of John's baptism? It
is clear that John's baptism had no connection with
ceremonial uncleanness. As a matter of fact, the doc
tors of the law thought the Jordan too impure for
sacred uses.3 Josephus,4 while he naturally gives an
inadequate description of the meaning of John's bap
tism, makes it plain that it was not connected with
the sacramental purification of the Jews for the wash
ing away of sin. He "commanded the Jews to ex
ercise virtue, both as to righteousness toward one
another, and piety toward God, and so to come to
baptism; for that the washing would be acceptable
to him, if they made use of it, not in order to the
demanding pardon of some sins, but for the purifica
tion of the body; supposing still that the soul was
thoroughly purified beforehand by righteousness." 5
1 eBaTrTuraTo. Lxx II Kings, 5 : 14.
2 Reynolds, "John the Baptist," p. 283. Cf. Chowlson, "Die Sabier "
8Cheyne, "Encycl. Biblica."
4 " Ant.," xviii, 5, 2.
8 Margoliouth's revision of Whiston's translation of Josephus, 1906

REMEDY 83
The obvious point in Josephus's account is that John
required spiritual renewal before the baptism. With
John there was no sacramental or magical power in
the ordinance. It did not convey righteousness nor
set one right with God. Josephus mentions no sym
bolic significance for the ordinance. He is not giving
a theological exposition of John's baptism, but the
popular impression produced by the ordinance. It is
not clear what Josephus means by the phrase "puri
fication of the body." The Jewish ablutions were
repeated as occasion (ceremonial defilement) de
manded. But that is not the point here. It is inter
esting to note that the disciples of John have a dispute1
with a Jew (probably Pharisee) concerning " purifica
tion" 2 (Josephus's word). The proximity of John
to Jesus and the concurrent baptizing by John and
by the disciples3 of Jesus was the occasion of the ar
gument. Probably this Jew (Pharisee) was seeking
baptism of Jesus, and the disciples of John wanted to
know why the baptism of John was not sufficient.4
The disciples of John regarded the new rite as their
master's prerogative, and resented the new work
begun by Jesus. John was not himself baptized, but
he had instituted the ordinance. Thus arose a dis
cussion concerning the relative merits and significance
of the baptism of John, of Jesus, and of the Pharisees.
Unfortunately we have no report of the arguments ad
vanced in this first debate on the meaning of baptism.
It was, in truth, a humbling rite that was demanded
1 Jijttjo-is (questioning). John 3 : 25.
2 nepl Ka.&apurp.ov. John 4:11.
4 Cf. John 3 : 26; Dods on John, in loco.

84 JOHN THE LOYAL
of those who had turned from their sins. It was not
a confession and turning from this or that sin, but " it
represented a complete purification; it was, as it were,
a lustration carried to the second power." 1 John de
manded of the people "to seal their repentance by
immersion in the Jordan." 2 The matter is clearly
put by Plummer on Matthew:3 "It is his office to
bind them to a new life, symbolized by immersion in
water." It is a new kind of " proselytes of righteous
ness" that John is seeking to make, men of real
righteousness in heart and life. No others were in
vited to his baptism except those who had, with repent
ance and confession, already entered upon this new
life. The Jew had to fling away pride of inheritance
and privilege and come as a repentant individual, con
fessing his sins and turning to a new life of righteous
ness. John was thus consecrating a "new Israel"4
of spiritual reality in contrast to the old one of birth
and ceremonial propriety. The public baptism was
a public confession of sin and a public pledge to lead
a new life. In a real sense, therefore, the baptism
came to stand for the whole work of John. It was
the outward sign that stood for the inward reality.
A constant5 stream of people went forth and were
baptized of John. It was a wonderful spectacle, " so
new, so mighty, so terrific." 6 They all "went out to
be baptized of him." 7 They were certainly not all
sincere. Some probably wished the baptism as a sub-
•Godet, "Luke," p. 110.
2 Weiss, "Life of Christ," vol. I, p. 313. s P. 28.
4 Bebb, in " Hastings's D. B."
8 Mark 1 : 5, et-eiropevero, eSairri£oi'TO.
8 Keim, "Jesus of Nazara," vol. I, p. 257. » Luke 3 : 7.

REMEDY 85
stitute for repentance or as a means of securing for
giveness of sins.1 "Supercilious Rabbis, long-robed
Pharisees, cold and courtly Sadducees, dignified high-
priests, circumspect Levites, grey-haired elders of the
people; the rich farmer with full barns, and the poor
peasant; soldiers of the Tetrarch Antipas, from Perea;
perhaps, also, proselytes from the Roman garrison at
Jerusalem, more disposed to accept baptism in the
Jordan than circumcision; publicans — born Jews,
but despised and hated, alike for their calling and
their unjust exactions, — found themselves together." 2
Small wonder that John indignantly demanded of
the Pharisees and Sadducees why they had come to
his baptism. Some had come to scoff. The Phari
sees and lawyers as a whole refused to be baptized by
John. They were not willing, these theologians and
custodians of current orthodoxy, to admit that they
needed to repent. To accept John's baptism, they
held, would be to admit that they were not competent
leaders of the religious thought of the time, would be
to put themselves on a level with the am-ha-aretz, who
were accepting John's baptism. The publicans and
sinners came readily, but the theological lights " frus
trated the counsel of God concerning themselves." 3
John's baptism came to be regarded as a rebuke to
the leaders. It was a call to repentance that was
heard by some and was disregarded by others. John
made it plain also that those who came to his baptism
confessed their faith in the coming Messiah, as Paul
1 Plummer on Luke, in loco.
2 Geike, " Life and Words of Christ," vol. I, p. 397.
8 Plummer on Luke 7 : 29 f . Tip/ Povkyv tov iJeoG qdeTTja'av eis eavrous.

86 JOHN THE LOYAL
(Acts 19 : 4) explained. This point is clear in John's
own words, preserved in Matt. 3 : 11 f.; Mark 1 : 7 f.;
Luke 3 : 16 f. Another point to note in John's bap
tism is that it brought men to decision (Stalker, " The
Two St. Johns," p. 212).
What was the relation of John's baptism to Chris
tian baptism ? There has been a good deal of need
less misunderstanding on the exact relation between
the baptizing done by John and that done by the dis
ciples of Jesus and commanded by him.1 Jesus him
self did not baptize, but his disciples.2 It seems, in
fact, that after the imprisonment of the Baptist the
disciples of Jesus ceased to baptize, perhaps to avoid
the excitement unavoidable to the ordinance at that
time, as shown by the experience of the Baptist and
the early baptizing of Christ's disciples. It was re
newed on a large scale at Pentecost, after Christ's
resurrection.3 It is not to be supposed that the early
baptizing by Christ's disciples4 included the rebaptiz-
ing of those already baptized by John. Jesus was
carrying on the work of John, not doing it over again.
The first disciples of Jesus were disciples of John,
and there is no evidence that they were baptized
again.5 The case of the twelve so-called disciples of
John at Ephesus, who were baptized by Paul,6 is not
pertinent. These men had missed the essential points
in the preaching of John (repentance, faith in the
coming Messiah). They had the baptism of John
only in form, not in essence. They were remnants of
i Matt. 28 : 19. Genuine in spite of recent efforts to discredit the verse
2 John 4: If. 8 Acts 2: 38, 41. 4 John 3 : 26. 6 John 1 : 35 ft".
8 Acts 19 : 1-10. See closing chapter of this book.

REMEDY 87
the disciples of John who had lingered on distinct
from the Christians, and did not really represent
John's work. Apollos had also only the baptism of
John,1 but he was not rebaptized. Besides, the Lord
Jesus himself received John's baptism.2 What was
good enough for Jesus was good enough for his dis
ciples. In broad oudine, therefore, the baptism of
John was essentially the same as that of Christian
baptism.3 The matter might be allowed to drop
right here but for the difficulty felt by some over the
words of Jesus concerning John: "He that is least
in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he." 4
Whatever this means, it casts no reflection on John's
baptism. It may be said in passing that Jesus does
not mean to exclude John from the kingdom in reality,
for he had just called him the greatest of those born
of women. He means to emphasize the opportunity
offered to those who come after John with the fuller
light of the new dispensation, of which John was the
harbinger. It is urged by some that John himself
draws a sharp distinction between his baptism and
that by Christ.5 That is true. But the baptizing6 by
Christ is figurative, not literal. John does not here
discusb the water baptism commanded by Jesus in
Matt. 28 : 19, and at first practised by the disciples
of Jesus.7 What exactly John has in mind by the
figurative baptism to be performed by the Messiah
is matter for future discussion, but it is not pertinent
> Acts 18 : 25.
2 Matt. 3 : 13 ff.; Mark 1 : 9 f.; Luke 3 : 21 f.
8 Broadus on Matthew, pp. 240 f. 4 Matt. 11 : 11.
8 Matt. 3 : 11 f.; Mark 1 : 7 f.; Luke 3 : 16 f.
8 iv nve'ip.ari a-yca, Kai nvpl. 7 John 3 : 26.

88 JOHN THE LOYAL
here. It is beyond doubt true that Jesus saw a sym
bolic meaning in his baptism at the hands of John
not seen by John himself.1 That symbolic content is
clearly set forth by Paul in its relation both to Jesus
and the believer.2 It is not necessary to suppose,
nor is it likely, that John saw the fulness of this
symbolism. But the essence of Paul's thought (the
death to sin and the pledge to newness of life) is in
volved in John's doctrine of repentance in relation
to baptism. The form of expression is changed, but
the heart of the idea is the same. Jesus himself en
dorsed the baptism of John by submitting to it him
self. He accepted its validity for his disciples. He
agreed that it came from heaven and had God's
authority. But, like the work of John as a whole, it
was not to go on save in that of Christ. For a while
John kept on baptizing after he baptized Jesus, but
that could not go on indefinitely.
7. Reformation. — John was a practical reformer.
His mission as herald3 included vigorous handling of
ethical problems. He had no time for mere Levitical
ceremonial. His work as Forerunner of the Messiah
called for a general toning up of the life of the people.
But John did not make the mistake of putting reforma
tion to the front as the main thing. He did demand
fruit4 of the Pharisees and Sadducees who came to his
baptism, fruit before the baptism, as proof of repent-
1 Matt. 3 : 14 f.; Luke 18 : 38 f.
2 Rom. 6: 1-6. Cf. "John's Baptism," by J. R. Graves (1891), and
"Christie and Patristic Baptism," by J. W. Dale (1874), for controversial
aspects of the matter. 8 xijpvf .
4 Kapnov (Matt. 3:7) in the collective sense. But Luke (3 : 8) has
xapTrous in connection with the multitudes.

REMEDY 89
ance. John preached reformation in detail to the
various classes who came to him, yet not reformation
in place of the spiritual renewal out of which righteous
ness comes. "It was Jesus who proclaimed the in
wardness of true morality" l in the beatitudes, for
instance. But one must not , make the mistake of
supposing that John also did not grasp this concep
tion. His word "repentance" disproves that notion.
With John reformation follows repentance as result,
does not precede it as cause. The "fruit worthy of
repentance" 2 is fruit that proves the profession of
repentance to be genuine. In a word, if they were
not hypocrites, their life would show it. Josephus3
did not grasp clearly John's spiritual insight, and
spoke of the soul's being " thoroughly purified before
hand by righteousness," i. e., before coming to bap
tism. Josephus probably meant that morality caused
the purification. He says also that John commanded
the exercise of " righteousness toward one another." It
cannot be expected that Josephus would, at all points,
comprehend John's message. The people to whom
John was addressing such plain words had heard his
insistence on repentance and had come "to be bap
tized." 4 Hence, since John had reason to doubt the
sincerity of the profession of these classes, he was
justified in explaining to them that the new life sym
bolized by baptism meant quitting the old sins. The
baptized life was on the other side of the river of
baptism. The old life must be left behind. Indeed,
1 Bruce on Matthew, p. 83.
2 Matt. 3:7. 3 " Ant.," xviii, 5, 2. 4 Luke 3 : 7, 12.

90 JOHN THE LOYAL
three classes "asked" J John what particular sins they
had to give up. These special queries from the com
mon people, the publicans, and the soldiers are
echoes of John's demand for "fruit worthy of re
pentance." This sort of repentance people could
understand. It would pass muster with the man on
the street and was current in the court of heaven. It
was the appeal to life, to life as the source of moral
action, to life as proof of spiritual renewal. Like
every reformer, John's work was not wholly success
ful. But he lifted up his standard and exposed the
shortcomings of the people of his time. He had, at
any rate, made his protest. He made no ill-consid
ered social propaganda for the uplift of the people en
masse without spiritual regeneration as individuals.
He denounced the evils of classes as classes when it
was necessary, but more especially he touched the
individual life as the best way to raise the general
level of human happiness. The great masses of those
who heard John went away with their curiosity satis
fied but the moral nature unmoved. But many were
brought to new life. John did "turn the hearts of
the fathers to the children, and the disobedient to
walk in the wisdom of the just."2
8. John's Power as a Preacher. — We have pre
served just a few scraps of John's preaching, but they
bear the stamp of originality and enable us to form a
reasonably adequate conception of his power as a
preacher. That is, of course, always a composite re
sult. Often a sermon that shook the multitude is
1 Luke 3 : 10, 12, 14. 2 Luke 1 : 17.

REMEDY 91
cold and lifeless on the printed page. The magnetism
of the eye, the penetrating voice, the dominating right
hand, the masterful personality, the force of the
human will, the touch of soul upon soul are absent.
Robert Hall was a preacher of this type, whom Sir W.
Robertson Nicoll calls " perhaps the supreme preacher
of the last century." " We have no fit record of Hall's
sermons, and there is none probably which could fitly
represent the dazzling miracles of his eloquence"
(British Weekly, October 6, 1910). And yet some
men have the gift of projecting a large part of their
personality into the mere speech so that, if written
down, these words throb with life. They breathe and
burn. That was pre-eminently true of Jesus. His
words are spirit and life.1 It was true of John the
Baptist. This is the highest form of eloquence. Some
men attract attention by dress2 or mannerisms. But
John was dependent on no externals like these for
a hearing. He was a "field-preacher" like Antony
of Padua, like Whitfield. But so was Jesus, who
preached in street or common, as he could get a
hearing, as well as in the synagogues of worship.
John, like Jesus, was a young preacher, but he did
not pose as a young preacher nor was that the thing
which attracted attention. Indeed, the wonderful
maturity of his powers is what is most striking about
him. He has a consummate grasp of the great issues
of his day, due to prolonged reflection and study.
John was endowed with gifts of a high order. That
1 John 6 : 63.
2 False prophets had tried to imitate Elijah (Zech. 13 : 4). " Neither
shall they wear a garment of hair to deceive."

92 JOHN THE LOYAL
is manifest in the ringing words that we have in the
Synoptic Gospels. He had a lambent imagination
that played around his theme and lighted it up with
illustrations from the Old Testament and from the
life of the desert. He had an original way of putting
things, that peculiar thing called style, which stamps
all that a man says with his own individuality and
makes it recognizable anywhere. He had the gift of
speech in the best sense, not a fatal fluency of words,
but the power to pick the telling word. His sermons
hit the centre. They were not "orations," but talks
straight from the shoulder. There are few preachers,
if any, in the history of the world of whom it would be
true that just a few pages chosen from their published
writings would make the vivid, powerful impression
on the modern reader that is created by these frag
ments from John the Baptist.
John had a great message, it is true. That is a
large part of the preacher's power, his message. A
preacher who has no message is no herald. He has
no call from God or man. No one wishes to hear
him and few will endure him. John was a man sent
from God, and he never forgot that fact.1 He never
went far away from God's side. The word of the
Lord came2 unto John. He joyfully received it and
believed it. He believed his message which he
preached in the wilderness when no one else did. He
had faith and he had courage. No preacher can be
a coward and succeed. No preacher can be a sceptic
and succeed. Faith and courage are essentials in the
i John 1 : 6. aireoroAjieVos n-apa #eou. 2 Luke 3 : 2.

REMEDY 93
preacher. John had them both in a pre-eminent
degree. He had a passion for righteousness that
blazed like the flame of the Lord. It is curious to
find Ruegg1 saying that the trend of the Baptist's
preaching was Pharisaical. He had called the Phari
sees a "brood of vipers."
But John had also the spiritual qualification. He
had the Holy Spirit w'ith him from his birth. He had
the fellowship of the Spirit. He had communion with
God. There is nothing that can take the place of
this in the prophet,2 the " f or-speaker " for God.
Thus John had spiritual insight into his message and
his world. Thus it was that he was able to use his
great powers for the crisis which he faced. It is no
wonder, therefore, that this man was able to rise
above the fog of Pharisaism to the clear air of reality.
He had a new voice because he had a clear eye. He
had lived with God and had seen things as they were.
His words rang like peals of thunder over the moun
tains and reverberated down the wadys to the Dead
Sea. They echo yet through the centuries, the words
of this Voice in the Wilderness. It was mighty preach
ing that smote the hearts of men. Some were superfi
cial, as always, and the words passed over their heads.
Others had only a secular notion of the kingdom
and began to dream of place and power in that king
dom. The self-indulgent began to hope for change,
for a new king who would destroy the law and the
prophets. The poor and down-trodden would hope
for better times somehow. But the devout and
1 New Schaff-Herzog Encycl. 2 irpo-^rfnus.

94 JOHN THE LOYAL
deeply spiritual were stirred to the very heart. Men
and women talked religion under the trees, by the
river brink, on the rocks of the desert, by the road
side, at home. A new day had come to Israel. A
real preacher of righteousness had spoken again.

CHAPTER IV
VISION
"The latchet of whose shoes I am not worthy to stoop
down and unloose" (Mark 1:7).
1. The Wonder About John. — The now famous
preacher was known all over Palestine. His name
was upon every lip. Within the space of six months
he had sprung from absolute retirement into the bold
est publicity. John had become the sensation of the
year by reason of the novelty of his message and the
power of its delivery. He had thus far apparently
held back one aspect of his message. He had made
it plain that the kingdom of heaven had come nigh.
They were just on the eve of the greatest event in
Jewish history, yea, of human history. The air was
big with destiny. " The people were in expectation." J
The word suggests eager expectancy, on the tiptoe
of interest with the flutter of excitement. It was used
of the attitude of the people when they waited for
Zacharias to come out of the temple.2 It is the word
employed about the people who eagerly awaited the
return of Jesus from Decapolis to Capernaum.3 It is
the term that Luke selects to picture the hopeful look
1 irpoo-SoKwxros Be tov kaov. Luke 3 : 15. The verb is peculiar to Luke
outside of Matt. 11 : 3 (the word used by John in the embassy to Jesus);
24: 50 (used of the second coming); II Peter 3: 12, 14 (second coming
also). 2 Luke 1 : 21. ' Luke 2 : 40.
95

96 JOHN THE LOYAL
of the beggar at the Beautiful Gate when Peter and
John said, "Look on us."1 The eyes of all were
turned on John the Baptist.
"And all men reasoned 2 in their hearts concerning
John." It was inevitable that the question should
occur to many, Luke says, "all," what John really
was. He wrought no miracles, he made no claims
about himself. He had fearlessly denounced the sins
of the people, even of the hierarchy in Jerusalem.
He had spared none, high or low. The very tense
ness of his preaching had wrought upon the people so
that they had to work the matter out. If the Messi
anic Dispensation was at hand, as constantly an
nounced by John, who was the Messiah ? Who more
likely than this fearless preacher himself. As yet this
query was in the hush of the heart. But John either
read their hearts or overheard a whispered discussion
between two earnest souls. It was at best a surmise
"whether haply he were the Christ."3 The use of
"answered" by Luke4 shows that John all of a sud
den realized that the popular mind had taken this
turn about him. Evidently the time had come for
him to speak plainly on the subject. This he did,
probably on an occasion when there was a great
crowd, so that as many as possible could hear his
words. To be silent now would be to be disloyal
to the Messiah, whose Forerunner only John knew
' Acts 3 : 5.
2 SiaAoyiS'op.e'iw Cf . our dialogue. But note the middle voice. This
"dialogue" was in the heart, not yet uttered.
8 p4 irore auTos elij o xp"rr6t. The optative is due to the indirect ques
tion. Note the article with xpioros, the Anointed One, the Messiah. The
p4 iroTe puts it delicately with a shade of doubt.
4 3 : 16.

VISION 97
himself to be. Matthew and Mark do not give this
reason for John's utterance on this point, but the
point is really implied in the very distinction which
John here draws between himself and the Messiah.
Mark1 says that "he preached, saying." We must
understand that John had purposely held back a more
particular description of the Messiah himself until
now. The excitement was great enough as it was.
John probably had no definite idea as to how soon the
TMessiah would appear.!' He knew that he was nigh.
He had announced that fact. It was in all likelihood
a sore disappointment to John to find that his own
preaching had turned people's thoughts to himself
rather than to his Lord. Many a true minister is sub
jected to like mortification. These hints about John's
personality come at the very height of his reputation.
He is on the very crest of popular esteem. The lamp
was burning and shining with resplendent light, so
that even the Jerusalem ecclesiastics were willing to
rejoice in the brilliance of the new luminary.2 But
only for a season. They will indeed soon send a
formal embassy to John on the subject of his claims,3
showing thereby that[John's present disclaimer was not
accepted at once by all. But the nobility of John
comes out finely here. He was not willing to sail un
der false colors. He wished no reputation for what he
was not. He did not hesitate a moment.4 "Whom
do you take me to be?" Paul (Acts 13 : 25) repre
sents John as saying to the people.
1 1 : 7. eicij'pvo-o-ei> keyuv. This imperfect may be merely descriptive,
or it may be inchoative. Cf. Luke's reason.
2 John 5: 35. 2Johnl:19ff. ! Bruce on Matt. 3: 11.

98 JOHN THE LOYAL
2. The Mightier than John. — "John was perfectly
aware of the impression produced by his words. He
knew that they were breaking stony hearts and
crushing strong men. Soldiers were crying for mercy
and feeling the sharp edge of the sword of his mouth.
Harlots were weeping and penitent." 1 John had
brought the people " face to face with the Unseen "
and had made them "realize the grandeur of God,
and feel the supremacy of righteousness and true holi
ness." 2 But John was not deceived by all the mag
netism and manifestation of his preaching.3 He was
always able to take his own measure. The popular
excitement did not mislead him in the least. The
troubles concerning the false Samaritan Messiah4 may
have been partly due to the " tension of mind caused by
John's teaching." 5 John had something in his ex
perience to counterbalance the boundless enthusiasm
of the masses. The teachers of the law scouted his
claims to be the Forerunner and refused his baptism.6
Some of the crowd sneered that John had a demon.7
That waslthe true explanation of his peculiarities of
dress and diet as well as of his power with the people.
But John cared little for all this. It was a matter of
/indifference8 to him what people thought of him till he
J found that many were mistaking him for the Messiah.
This knowledge brought John in his consciousness
face to face with the Coming One.
1 Reynolds, "John the Baptist," p. 261.
2 Farrar, "Life of Lives," p. 177.
3 Holtzmann, "Life of Jesus," p. 119.
> Josephus, "Ant.," xviii, 4, 1 and 2.
8 Farrar, "Life of Lives," p. 177.
8 Luke 7 : 30. J Matt. 11 : 18; Luke 7 : 33.
8 Holtzmann, "Life of Jesus," p. 119.

VISION 99
The people needed a clear word about the King.
" There cometh after me he that is mightier than I." x
The term "the Coming One" occurs in the New Tes
tament as a description of the promised Messiah.2
Mark and Luke represent John as describing the
Messiah as " the mightier than I," 3 while Matthew
turns the expression round: "The One coming after
me4 is mightier than I." In the one case the predicate
is "cometh" and accents the near advent of the
Mighty One. In the other case the predicate equals
" is mighty " and accents the strength of the Coming
One. The Jews, according to the Talmud, fre
quently spoke of the Messiah as Habba, the Coming
One.5 The phrase in itself is future in sense though
the present participle is used. But in the mind of
John the idea is that of near future, one just coming.6
John knew that the time was near from the moral
condition of the period. His own intuition led him
to see this much.7 But Luke8 expressly tells us that
the word of the Lord had come to John. It is not
scientific to exclude the guidance of the Holy Spirit
from John's vision in this crucial point in his message.
He had already said repeatedly that the kingdom of
heaven had drawn near.9 John instinctively feels that
the King is now very near.

' Mark 1:7; Matt. 3:11; Luke 3 : 16.
2 Cf. John 11 : 27. The confession of Martha o xpwros b vios toO #eofl
eis t6w xoo-p-ov ipxonevos. Cf . John 1 : 9 (probable interpretation). So John
3 : 31. 8 6 urxvpoYepos piov. 4 6 Se birioio p,ov epxbp-evos.
6 Broadus on Matthew, p. 50. Cf. Ps. 118 : 26; Zech. 9 : 9; Mal. 3 : 1.
« Bruce on Matthew, p. 83 f.
' Ibid. 8Luke 3:2; 1 : 15.
9 The perfect tense r/yyixev is used by Jesus in Matt. 26 : 45 f. for the
approach of Judas in the garden and the hour of betrayal.

100 JOHN THE LOYAL
John here depicts the Messiah as the Mighty One,
mightier than himself. It is no mock humility. As
already noted John knew his power over the people.
Jesus has added his word about John's real greatness.1
But John is perfectly sincere when he compares him
self to one of the lowest slaves in the house of the
Messiah. The humblest menial would meet the
Master of the house at the door, "stoop down and
unloose " 2 the latchet of his shoes.3 Matthew4 adds
"to bear" the shoes on into the house. He does not
feel qualified5 to act in this humble capacity in the
presence of the Coming One.
The use of the term "mightier than" John leads
Bruce6 to think that John had a false conception of
the Messiah as one whose chief attribute was strength
(and dignity). But surely John is not thinking of mere
prowess. It is rather force of character that must
enter into John's notion of the Mighty One.7 The
term is used of moral and spiritual energy also.8 It is
the moral grandeur of the Messiah that causes John
to feel his own insignificance so keenly. It is the
conception of the greatness of the Strong Son of God
that fills his heart rather than the Good Shepherd or
the Prince of Peace.8 The vision which John has is
indeed inadequate, but not erroneous. It is not yet
"Matt. 11: 11; Luke 7: 28.
2 Mark 1 : 7, <cmpas ACo-ai. Note punctiliar act (aorist). Not even once.
8 i7ro8ijp.a.Ta (bound under the foot), not o-avSikia (Matt. 6:9: Acts
12:8). 4 fiaorao-at. Aorist also. Single act.
5 inav6s. "Not fit to carry" (Broadus, "Matthew," p. 50).
8 "Matthew," p. 84. i 6 io-Xvpirep6, p.ov.
8 Cf. Heb. 5:7; 6 : 18. Indeed, icrXvs is confined to the moral sense in
the New Testament. Cf. Mark 12 : 30; Eph. 1 : 19; Rev. 5 : 12 etc
9 Reynolds, "John the Baptist," p. 267.

VISION 101
based on personal knowledge, but is more than "re
ligious preconception." J
The use of the article (the Coming One, the Mightier
One) suggests that he ought to be known after he
comes. John will later testify of him that he was
before him as well as after him.2
3. The Messianic Baptism. — The baptism of John
was the outstanding characteristic of his ministry.
John therefore naturally uses that to show the superi
ority of the Coming One. He will surpass John in
the very matter in which the people thought John to
be supreme. There is, of course, no contrast drawn
between the water-baptism performed by John and
that performed by the disciples of Jesus.3 John
cannot be understood as reflecting on water-baptism,
for he continued to practise it and did so after the
disciples of the Messiah were doing the same.4 John
uses his literal baptism as the figure for the entire
work of the coming Messiah and, indeed, for the
Messianic Dispensation.5 The report in Matthew6
of John's words adds the explanation of the nature of
his baptism: "I indeed baptize you in water unto
repentance." 7 His baptism was a " repentance-bap
tism," a baptism marked by, or preceded by repent
ance.8 John's baptism bound the baptized to lead

1 Bruce, "Matthew," p. 84.
2 John 1 : 15. He has gone ahead of John in [rank (ep.npo9iv pov)
as he was before him in essential superiority (wpS>T6s p.ov). At the mani
festation of the Messiah he took the place ahead of John, which belonged
to him by his nature. Cf. Westcott on John 1 : 15.
8 Broadus on Matthew, p. 48. * John 3 : 23-26.
5 Broadus on Matthew, p. 48. " 3 : 11.
7 eyw p.ev vp.as 0awTl£ft» iv vSan els fuerdvoiav.
8 Mark 1:4; Luke 3: 3.

102 JOHN THE LOYAL
a life worthy of the repentance already professed.1
John's baptism was a symbol of repentance, a picture
of the spiritual change wrought by the Holy Spirit.
" The Messiah, will steep in the Holy Ghost those who
have been baptized by John." 2 The Coming One,
the Messiah, " is coming to immerse them in an ele
ment far more potent — the Holy Spirit and fire." 3
The Messiah will bring the spiritual baptism symbol
ized by the water-baptism. John does not, of course,
mean to say that those baptized by him have not had
the spiritual renewal. But the Messiah is to be en
dowed with the Holy Spirit in an especial sense.4 It
is the power5 of the Messiah that John has in mind.
Jesus himself after his resurrection used the same
image of baptism for what is to take place on the
great day of Pentecost.6 The great importance of this
word of John about the Messiah is seen in the fact
that it is reported by the three Synoptic Gospels,7 by
the Fourth Gospel 8 as repeated by the Baptist on a
later occasion, by Simon Peter9 in the report at Jeru
salem of his experience at Caesarea, in the house of
Cornelius, by Paul at Antioch in Pisidia,10 who men
tions John's "baptism of repentance," and explains
that John pointed to the one who was to come after
him. So at Ephesus11 Paul explained that John
preached the baptism of the Holy Spirit which was
1 Luke 3:8. 2 Holtzmann, "Life of Jesus," p. 120.
8 Plummer on Matthew, p. 28.
4 Cf. Isa. 11:2. So Enoch 49 : 3; 62 : 2; Psalms of Solomon 17 : 42;
Test, of the Twelve Pat. (Levi 18, Juda 24). Cf . Allen on Matthew, p. 25 f.
6 aiTbs 84 Mark 1:8. 8 Acts 1 : 5.
' Matt. 3:11; Mark 1 : 8; Luke 3 : 16.
8 John 1:33. 9 Acts 11: 16. " Acts 13 : 24 ff
11 Acts 19 : 2 ff.

VISION 103
symbolized by his baptism of repentance. Jesus him
self will not literally immerse men in water, nor burn
them with fire. It is the great spiritual energy of the
Messiah that John sees.1 The language of the Bap
tist here, before he sees the Messiah, is well illustrated
by the words of Peter on the Day of Pentecost, when
the fulness of the Spirit's power has come upon the
disciples.2 Mark3 has " I baptized you," a single look
at John's work.
Matthew4 and Luke5 add " and in fire," which point
is not reported by Mark. The addition is remarka
ble and it looks like a mixture of images. The allu
sion remains obscure, and we may probably never
know exactly what was John's idea.6 Bruce takes
both Holy Spirit and fire to refer to the judicial func
tion of the Messiah. "The whole baptism of the
Messiah, as John conceives it, is a baptism of judg
ment. ... I think that the grace of Christ is not here
at all." 7 Bruce takes " spirit" in the sense of " wind."
The three destructive elements (water, wind, fire) all
come in judgment on the people. But, attractive as
this looks, it is not conclusive. In support of this
idea it is urged that "fire" in Matt. 3 : 10 (Luke 3 : 9)
undoubtedly means Messianic judgment. The same
thing is true of "unquenchable fire" in Matt. 3 : 12
(Luke 3 : 17). It appears natural to take fire in
Matt. 3 : 11 and Luke 3 : 16 in the same sense. But
if that be granted (for the moment) it does not follow
1 Cf. John 44 : 3; Ezek. 36 : 25-27; Joel 2 : 28; 3:1.
2 Acts 2 : 16-24. 8 1 : 8, ipi-nrio-a. Punctiliar.
4 3 : 11. ital vvpt. 8 3 : 16.
8 Plummer on Luke, p. 95. 7 On Matthew, p. 84.

104 JOHN THE LOYAL
that "Holy Spirit" refers to judgment also. That is
to make an arbitrary limitation of John's language
and horizon to fit a theory. John did himself preach
"repentance," the work of the Holy Spirit. Broadus1
agrees with Bruce as to "fire," but refuses to limit
the "Holy Spirit" to the work of judgment. This
view requires the "you" to include both classes, the
penitent and the impenitent. Plummer once2 held
this to be "very improbable," but he has come to see
it to be possible,3 for " in the next verse the two classes
are clearly distinguished." This is the common view
among commentators, as Bruce admits.4 Another
view takes both the Holy Spirit and fire to refer to
the cleansing and purifying work of grace. Appeal
is made to Mal. 3 : 2 f., where the Messiah is com
pared to the refiner's fire which illuminates and puri
fies.5 By this view the baptism of fire is the baptism
of the Holy Spirit. The refiner's fire purifies the
silver and the gold,6 but this refining fire is also likened
to a furnace which consumes all who do evil.7 Still
others take the figure to picture the fiery trials which
Jesus and his followers must pass through.8 The
matter must be left an open one, but the startling
image was doubtless expanded by John so that his
hearers understood what he meant by the allusion.
' On Matthew, p. 51 f.
2 "Luke," p. 95.
8 "Matthew," p. 29. Plummer ("Luke," p. 95) rightly considers a
reference to the tongues of fire on the Day of Pentecost unlikely. Cf.
Acts 1:5.
4 "Matthew," p. 84.
8 Cf. Bengel, in loco.
8 Holtzmann, "Life of Jesus," p. 120.
'Mal. 3: 19; 4:1.
8 Luke 12 : 50; Mark 10 : 38 f.; I Pet. 1 : 4.

VISION 105
4. The Messianic Judgment. — There is no doubt of
the element of judgment in John's picture of the Mes
siah in Matt. 3 : 12 and Luke 3 : 17. But the image
here is not that of baptism. It is that of the winnow
ing shovel.1 It is a bold and impressive picture.
The Messiah steps forth with the winnowing shovel
in his hand. The grain and chaff together are cast
up before the wind. The grain falls down together,
while the chaff is blown farther away. The grain
and the chaff are thus separated by the Messiah.
The grain is gathered into the garners.2 The chaff
the Messiah will burn up with unquenchable fire.3
The adjective is used either of a fierce fire that cannot
be extinguished or of an endless fire that will never
go out.4 It is not clear which is John's idea.5 It is
never safe to press figurative language too far. It is
not clear whether the apocalyptic language of John
is to be interpreted of eternal punishment of the in
dividual or the terrible judgments upon the people of
Israel who will reject the Messiah (cf. the destruction
of Jerusalem). The destructive force of fire is one of
the most powerful agents in nature. The terrible
forest-fires of modern times sweep all before them,
driving men and wild beasts in common flight to a
place of refuge. The conflagrations at Baltimore
and San Francisco have left a deep mark upon the
modern mind. John had said before to the Pharisees
1 TTTVOV.
2 a-irofriJKTi, place of deposit (a-irori-SripLi). Cf. Matt. 6:26; 13:30. Cf.
,rapa#ijmi, in I Tim. 6 : 20.
87rvpi io-BeVr? (cf. asbestos). Cf. Lev. 6 : 12 f.; Isa. 34 : 8-10, etc.
4 Plummer on Luke, p. 95 f.
» «aTaitavo-ei (cf. Matt. 13:30) has the " perfective " use of the preposi
tion Kara that argues for inextinguishable fire.

106 JOHN THE LOYAL
and Sadducees that the Messiah was like the wood
man with his axe at the root of the tree, to fell it if it
be found without fruit. Here he is depicted as the
thresher to find out if the harvest has come to aught.
John's preaching is not for light-minded and dissolute
people.1 He has a word for the earnest and the sin
cere. The use of the apocalyptic imagery of Joel by
Peter on the Day of Pentecost is a good example of
the manner in which apocalyptic language is to be
interpreted. The words of Jesus in Matt. 24 and 25
furnish another parallel. John wished to leave the
people with a picture of the Messiah's power. He has
turned their minds away from flippant thoughts about
himself. They need to have searching of heart in
the approaching presence of the Messiah of Israel.
" Behold, the day cometh that shall burn as an oven,
and all that do wickedly shall be stubble: and the
day that cometh shall burn them up, saith the Lord
of Hosts, that it shall leave them neither root nor
branch." 2 One can imagine the hush of solemn awe
that swept over John's audience as he spoke of the
burning of the chaff in language that recalled the ter
rible picture of Malachi.
5. The Sign of the Messiah. — Perhaps some of the
crowd turned round to see if the Messiah had not
really appeared. The Messianic hope had died down
a good deal before John revived it. It had ceased to
be an active one in the popular consciousness.3 It
was not, indeed, entirely lost with the people. In the
1 Holtzmann, "Life of Jesus," p. 121. 2 Mal. 4 : 1.
8 Schuerer, "Jewish People," etc., sec. div., II, p. 136.

VISION 107
prophets it was " an essential element of their religious
consciousness." x It had at first been a better hope
for the nation and then for the world. It had also
given a better hope for the individual. Under the
Maccabees the Pharisees and scribes had revived the
national hope of a great Messianic empire for the
Jews.2 But Roman power had dashed those hopes
of earthly power. Still the Pharisees cherished the
dream of throwing off the hated Roman yoke. When
the Messiah comes he will do that. The people who
heard John's burning words did not all agree in their
notions of the Messiah. Some felt that, when the
Messiah comes, no one will know whence he comes.3
The scribes understood from Micah 5 : 2 that the
Messiah would be born in Bethlehem.4 "There is
more than enough to show that the people generally
were expecting a sublime yet lurid blending of heaven
and earth; a vengeance upon the enemies of Israel,
a new heir and occupant of the throne of David, a
political Leader, a great Prophet, a resistless King,
who should use his supernatural powers to promote
his interests, to judge the nations, and to place others
in a position of civil, intellectual, and political su
premacy." 5 The rabbis had formed a picture of the
Messiah quite different from that of the Old Testa
ment, and far other than the reality as seen in Jesus
of Nazareth.6 They thought more of him as King
and Deliverer, and less as Prophet and Priest.7 One
1 Ibid., p. 129. 2 Cf. " The Psalms of Solomon."
8 John 7 : 27, 31. 4 Cf . Matt. 2 : 4 f . ; John 7 : 41 f .
8 Reynolds, "John the Baptist," p. 266.
8 Edersheim, "Life and Times," vol. I, p. 160.
Ibid., p. 167.

108 JOHN THE LOYAL
may turn to the Psalter of Solomon and to the Jewish
portion of the Book of Enoch and of the Sybilline
Oracles for the rabbinical notion of the Messiah.
The Talmud also preserves to some extent the pre-
Christian point of view. The gospels reveal also the
Pharisaic idea of the Messiah. The repeated desire
of the Pharisees for a sign from heaven shows how
they looked for a heavenly portent in connection with
his coming.
But it is an injustice to John the Baptist to limit
his conception of the Messiah to the Pharisaic stand
point. He saw in dim outline, but he saw clearly
what he saw. On the other hand,1 we need not set
John above his times entirely, nor beyond the great
Day of Pentecost. The disciples of Jesus could not
grasp clearly the idea of a spiritual kingdom till that
day of illumination. Just before Christ's ascension
the disciples still look for a temporal kingdom.2 In
deed John has not made it perfectly clear in the words
preserved to us what his idea of the Messiah was in
all respects. He pulled back the veil far enough to
see the presence of the Messiah. He felt the presence
of the Messiah though he could not now see him.
His baptizing, he will later explain, was for the pur
pose of manifesting the Messiah to Israel.3 "And I
knew him not; but that he should be made manifest
to Israel, for this cause came I baptizing with water."
John had been used of God to create the conditions
under which the Messiah would appear.4 John may
1 Geike, " Life and Words of Christ," vol. I, p. 406.
2 Acts 1:6. 8 John 1 : 31 f.
4 Weiss, " Life of Christ," vol. I, p. 319.

VISION 109
or may not have seen the boy Jesus in his early days.
There is no proof that he did. But certainly he had
no personal acquaintance with Jesus at this time,
when he is on the lookout for the Messiah. He had
a sign given him by God. Note how John speaks of
his relation to God: "He that sent me to baptize
with water, he said unto me." s This word lets us
into John's own consciousness of his mission. He
had received his commission from God, and the Father
still communicated with him. In a word, he claims
revelation as the Fourth Gospel reports him. The
sign of the Messiah was for John's own personal bene
fit. The Holy Spirit will descend on the Messiah.
When John sees that event, he will know that he has
met the Messiah.2 John mentions here also3 the fact
that the Messiah will baptize with the Holy Ghost.
This point he had quite laid to heart. John knew
that the Messiah was near. He knew what the proof
would be.
6. Where is the Messiah? — The Talmud not only
admitted that the Messiah might be among the living,
but actually tells the strange story that he had been
born in the royal palace at Bethlehem, had been dis
covered by Rabbi Judan and had been carried away
in a storm.4 Jewish tradition was busy with the no
tion of the Messiah's concealment. Where was the
Messiah? Did not John scan carefully the face of
every man who came to him for baptism? He may
have had many a flutter of expectation, but the sign
i John 1 : 33. 2 Ibid. * Ibid.
4 Edersheim, "Life and Times," vol. I, p. 175.

110 JOHN THE LOYAL
did not come. What will the Messiah look like?
How long will John have to wait before he comes?
His mission was to manifest1 the Messiah. Till that
had been accomplished he had not done his work.
He must be able to say to the people : " There is the
Messiah!" Did he have his moments of doubt as
the Messiah still did not come? The strain was
great upon John. The crowds came and went.
John preached and baptized as usual. But his heart
went out in his look of expectant hope as he turned to
each new-comer. Where is the Messiah? John is
loyal to his vision, but he longs for the reality. He
still utters his cry: "Repent, for the kingdom of
heaven is at hand," but a change seems to have come
over him when it has become his solemn function to
discover and proclaim the King himself.2
* John 1 : 31. Iva ^tavepto&fj T(p *Io-paijA.
8 Reynolds, "John the Baptist," p. 312.

CHAPTER V
REALITY
I have need to be baptized of thee, and comest thou
tome?" (Matt. 3:14).
1. The Coming of Jesus to the Jordan. — The news
of what John had been doing came to Jesus, the car
penter, in Nazareth. The two men seem to have
been unacquainted. Mary may have told Jesus of
the kinship between them. Her heart must have
. been stirred afresh by what she heard of John. The
slow years of waiting had gone by and now at last the
Forerunner had lifted up his voice. The veil of
silence rests upon the thoughts of Mary till she ap
pears at the wedding in Cana, and bids the servants do
what Jesus commands.1 Had Mary kept all the
things known to her in her heart2 all the time? She
pondered them often through the years and watched
the grace of God upon Jesus and his growing favor
with the people of Nazareth.3 But did she come to
tell the great burden to her Son? On this point we
have no light. But she knew long ago that the Boy
had come to consciousness of his unique relation to
the Father and to his house.4
' John 2:5. 2 Luke 2 : 19. » Ibid., 2 : 52.
4 Luke 2 : 50. Cf. Weiss, " Life of Christ," vol. I, p. 319. Weiss is sure
that Mary told Jesus of her hopes about him, the promise of Gabriel to
her. Ill

112 JOHN THE LOYAL
Jesus is now probably thirty years old.1 John has
apparently been preaching some six months. If
John began in the spring, it would be autumn when
Jesus appears on the banks of the Jordan. This is
all conjecture, as we have no notes of time at all. The
year was probably A. D. 26. It was beyond doubt
with great stirring of heart that Jesus left his humble
home in Nazareth to go to the Jordan. He was not
the first to come from Galilee, as some have wrongly
inferred from Matthew's expression " from Galilee." 2
He apparently came alone, or at any rate he appears
alone before John. He had made up his mind before
coming that John was the Messianic Herald. He
had probably heard the talk of the people about John,
and the various opinions held concerning him. He
may, indeed, have heard of John's disclaimer about
being himself the Messiah and his proclamation that
the Messiah was about to appear. In a sense the
coming of Jesus to the Jordan was his response to
John's description of the Coming One. It is not neces
sary to insist that Matthew's " then" 3 joins the visit of
Jesus immediately on to the previous description of
the Messiah by the Baptist. The term is a very gen
eral one and is often used in Matthew (some ninety
times).4 Mark merely says "in those days," while
Luke5 implies that the bulk of John's work was over
(not of time, but of amount) "when all the people
were baptized." 6 Jesus had waited long enough for
1 Ibid., 3 : 23. Cf. Num. 4 : 3, 23, 30, 43, 47.
2Cf. Plummer, "Matthew," p. 31.
3 ToVe Matt. 3 : 13. 4 1 : 9. B 3 : 21.
8 iv tcj! BMTTio-^vai aira»Ta tov kaov. Strictly speaking, the aorist inf.
has no necessary notion of precedence, but is merely punctiliar. The

REALITY 113
the work of John to show its true nature and to pre
pare the people for his own ministry. He came at
what he evidently considered a fit moment all round.1
It was not that Jesus was carried away by the masses
in their enthusiasm about John,2 but the mighty im
pression of the work of John brought matters to an
issue in the mind of Jesus and led him to break his
silence and to enter upon his ministry. His visit was
not in the nature of inspection, but rather of deep
resolve to take up his work as Messiah. The glow
and stir of mighty thoughts are in the heart of Jesus
as he leaves Nazareth for the sixty-mile journey to
the Jordan. We do not know the place of meeting.
Later, John was at Bethany, beyond Jordan,3 but
even that point is unknown. Then again, John may
not have been at Bethany when Jesus came. It is
better not to try to decide the impossible. John prob
ably had many baptizing places along the Jordan at
the different fords. Jesus came to be baptized of
John.4 This was the object of his visit.
At last John and Jesus are face to face. Jesus5
"appears before John." Out of the ages the two
men of destiny meet. John had spent his years in
preparation for this moment. It is the culmination
of his life-work. It is the beginning of the ministry
of Jesus. Silently this crisis for John has come.
present inf. is, of course, durative, equals while. Both are common in
Luke. It is only by implication in the context that the aorist inf. with
iv tc3 equals after. Cf. Plummer, in loco.
1 Geike, " Life and Words of Christ," vol. I, p. 410.
2 Keim, "Jesus of Nazara," vol. II, p. 267.
3 John 1 : 28. Bethabara is without doubt erroneous. ' Matt. 3 : 13.
8 irpbs tov •luavriv. Matthew has the historical present Trapayiverai with
vivid dramatic effect.

114 JOHN THE LOYAL
Like two stars the two men touch each other's path
and move on.1 They meet only this once. John
sees Jesus on two other days,2 but they have no con
verse. Jesus knows who John is, but John at first
does not know who Jesus is. He was to him a
stranger. What is there in this stranger different
from the many others who had come to the baptism
of John ? John usually had a private interview with
those who sought baptism at his hands.3 It is prob
ably at such a private meeting that the two men first
see each other. Jesus is conscious of the significance
of their meeting, but John knows only that here is
another applicant for baptism.
2. John Recognizes the Messiah. — It is true that
the Synoptics give John's preaching before the bap
tism of Jesus and the Fourth Gospel afterward.4
But there is a retrospective allusion to the period
before the baptism in John 1 : 31-33. There is no
reason for disputing the express statement of the
Baptist that he did not know Jesus till the baptism.5
Besides, Jesus, though not a disciple of John,6 was
certain of the divine mission of John.7 There is a
rather unnecessary amount of trouble made over
John's instinctive insight into the character of Jesus
when he first greets him.8 "The gravest perplexity
1 Godet on Luke, p. 117 f. 2 John 1 : 29, 35.
8 Plummer on Matthew, p. 30. 4 Bebb in " Hastings's D. B."
D ovk jjSeiv aurov equals no knowledge of him, not mere personal ac
quaintance (eyvcov). Lange, "Life of Christ," vol. II, p. 23 f., curiously
holds that John knew Jesus.
6 Renan, "Vie de Jesus," p. 107.
7 Lange, "Life of Christ," vol. II, p. 22.
8 " The apparent inconsistency between Matt. 3 : 14 and John 1 : 33
has tested the sagacity of interpreters." Lange, " Life of Christ," vol.
II, p. 24.

REALITY 115
has been allowed to gather round this apparent dis
crepancy." x It is possible, indeed, that John may
have heard something of the early history of his kins
man through Zacharias and Elizabeth.2 In the pri
vate interview, when Jesus sought baptism, John may
have learned his name and claims. The brief dia
logue in Matthew may be the conclusion of the inter
view, not the whole of it. It may have been the pro
found impression made upon John by the powerful
personality of Jesus that caused him to protest: "I
have need to be baptized of thee, and comest thou to
me?" John stood in the presence of the One Sinless
Man. His baptism symbolized repentance from sin,
but here was one who had no sin and whose baptism
would be meaningless. Besides, John himself had
not been baptized. Here was one qualified for that
service. John had come to be an expert in reading
the human face, for many thousands had asked bap
tism of him. But he had never looked into a face
like that of this Stranger. John was face to face with
the greatest personality of history, and felt a moral
awakening in his own sensitive soul. Here was "the
Christ of Reality" 3 standing before John, the Com
ing One of whom he had spoken and dreamed. In
these brief moments of rapid intuition, of spiritual
illumination, John may have gotten more light than
he had ever received before.4 The mind works
quickly in such supreme moments. The purity and
the greatness of the Stranger overawed John. " There
1 Reynolds, "John the Baptist," p. 313.
2 Ibid., p. 314. 3 Bruce on Matthew, p. 85.
4 Nourse in "Standard Bible Dictionary."

116 JOHN THE LOYAL
was something in His look, something in the sinless
beauty of His ways, something in the solemn majesty
of His aspect which at once overawed and capti
vated the soul of John. ... As when some unknown
dread checks the flight of the eagle, and makes him
settle with hushed scream and drooping plumage on
the ground, so before the royalty of inward happiness,
before the purity of sinless life, the wild prophet of
the desert becomes like a submissive and timid child." x
John tried to hinder2 Jesus in his purpose to be bap
tized. He knows that he is standing before one who
.is superior in all moral and spiritual qualities. He
can feel that. How much more John means by his
protest we do not know. He has not yet seen the
sign of the Messiah which will confirm his present
intuitions. He had recently spoken of the one who
was coming the latchet of whose shoes he was not
worthy to stoop down and unloose. All unexpectedly
John finds himself in the presence of One whose pres
ence makes him feel just that way. Is he not the
Coming One, the Messiah ? It is no affectation with
John, but the deepest reverence of his soul which he
here offers to the One Supreme Man whom he has
now met. Matthew alone gives this perplexity and
reluctance of John to baptize Jesus. Mark merely
mentions the fact of the baptism without any inter
pretation, while Luke puts the baptism of Jesus in a
subordinate clause, "Jesus also having been bap
tized." 3 He seems to be mainly concerned with the
1 Farrar, "Life of Christ," vol. I, p. 115.
2 Bieiabkvev. Matt. 3 : 14. Conative imperfect and note Bia also.
8 3 : 21.

REALITY 117
divine recognition given Jesus. In John1 the baptism
is assumed as well known, and the Baptist states that
he has seen the Holy Spirit come upon Jesus. This
the Synoptics show took place at the baptism. Bruce2
correcdy notes that this order illustrates the order of
the gospels from Mark to John, and the varying in
terest in the subject of the baptism of Jesus by John.
But Bradley3 labors hard to prove thereby that John
did not recognize Jesus as the Messiah, did not bap
tize him, and that the followers of Jesus invented the
baptism of Jesus by John to relieve the embarrass
ment from this awkward situation. This is surely a
strained reversal of the known facts about John, an
arrangement more ingenious than true. The fact that
Matthew proceeds to give the sign of the Holy Spiri£
at the baptism shows that he did not consider what he
has written to be inconsistent with that. The knowl
edge that would come at the baptism with the sign of
the Messiah would be like a blaze of light bursting on
John's4 mind. But even now the Baptist stands a
suppliant before the One who has come, who is the
true light that was to come. It is John's mission to
bathe in this light so as to give a clearer witness of it.5
3. The Significance of the Baptism of Jesus. — John
was humble in the presence of Jesus, as was Peter,
later, when he said: "Lord, dost thou wash my
feet?" 6 That was the proper spirit in the presence
i 1 : 32. 2 " Matthew," in loco.
3 Biblical World, June, 1910, pp. 399 ff. Weiss ("Life of Christ," vol.
I, p. 319) says that the question in Matt. 3 : 15 "cannot possibly involve
a contradiction of John's declaration just alluded to (John 7 : 31, 33)."
4 Reynolds, "John the Baptist," p. 315. 8 John 1 : 7 ff.
8 John 13 : 6. Cf. Smith. " In the Days of His Flesh," p. 31.

118 JOHN THE LOYAL
of the Messiah. But why had Jesus come to be
baptized by John? Nothing in the career of John
has given rise to more discussion. As already stated,
some writers deny that Jesus was baptized by John.
Others deny that John acknowledged Jesus to be the
Messiah. In Mark the narrative is objective and
the baptism of Jesus by John relates the work of the
Messiah to that of the Forerunner and furnishes proof
of Messianic authority.1 Luke accents the spiritual
earnestness of Jesus on the occasion ("praying") and
the divine endorsement of the Son as he enters on his
work at the age of thirty.2
But Matthew seems concerned also with another
question — that of the propriety of the baptism of
Jesus by the Baptist. He had said that Jesus came
"to be baptized of him." It is doubtless true that
disciples of Jesus were puzzled over the fact that
Christ had sought baptism at the hands of the Baptist
just as the publicans and sinners had done. But the
difficulty is a natural one, and could have occurred to
John himself at the time of the baptism of Jesus. It
is quite gratuitous to urge that Matthew has invented
this reply of Jesus "to get rid of the difficulty of a
sinless Messiah accepting repentance-baptism." 3 We
have samples of such invention. Jerome4 quotes the
gospel according to the Hebrews as saying : " Behold
the Mother of the Lord, and His brethren said to
Him, John the Baptist baptizeth for the remission of
sins; let us go and be baptized by him. But He said
1 Allen, "Matthew," p. 28. Cf. Matt. 21 : 24 ff.
2Godet, "Xuke," p. 118.
8 Plummer, " Matthew," p. 31. ! " Adv. Pelag.," ill, 2.

REALITY 119
to them, What sins have I committed, that I should
go and be baptized by him? Except perchance this
very thing that I have said is ignorance." The words
of Jesus in Matthew belong to another world, and bear
the stamp of originality.1 Indeed, this very difficulty
about the baptism of Jesus is itself strong evidence for
its being historical.2
There are really two questions involved : the bap
tism of Jesus at all, the baptism by John. The reply
of Jesus does not give, in general, the design of his
baptism, a matter also worthy of discussion, but
rather the reason why it should be done by one who
was his inferior. This was the precise point raised
by John in Matt. 3 : 14. He felt that he had nothing
to offer Jesus. The rather he had much to receive
from him. This is the exact point in the reply of
Jesus : " Suffer it now : for thus it becometh us to
fulfil all righteousness." Jesus means to say that,
though superior to John, as John has just said, yet for
the present3 their real relations may properly4 be re
versed. Jesus does not say that he is under a neces
sity, or even obligation, to be baptized. He does not
admit that he feels the "need" of baptism at John's
hands felt by John toward Christ. The "us"5 nat
urally refers to only John and Jesus, the two persons
concerned in the matter.
It cannot be said that the purpose expressed by

• Cf. also the language in the " Preaching of Paul," in the Tractalus de
Rebaptismate. 17 (Hartel, ii, p. 90), for another illustration.
2 Plummer, "Matthew," p. 31.
•Mes aprt. This particular juncture (dpri), not vvv.
* irpeirov iarlv, not Set. 5 Mf-iv.

120 JOHN THE LOYAL
Jesus " to fulfil all righteousness " J covers the whole
problem of the sinlessness of Christ and the baptism.
It meets one aspect of the difficulty raised by John.
The argument implied runs thus : John's baptism
was from heaven in its origin and authority2; to accept
John's baptism meant to welcome the reign of heaven
proclaimed by it; therefore it was incumbent upon all
good men to submit to it.3 If Jesus did not submit
to John's baptism, he at once placed himself in the
attitude of the Pharisees and scribes who rejected the
baptism of John.4 There would then arise the anom
alous situation of the Messiah, whom the Forerunner
had proclaimed, standing apart from this Forerunner
and apparently hostile to him. "It was impossible
for such an one, on the ground of being the Messiah,
or even on the ground of sinlessness, to treat John's
baptism as a thing with which He had no concern.
Love, not a sense of dignity or of moral faultlessness,
must guide His actions. . . . Christ's baptism might
create misunderstanding, just as His associating with
publicans and sinners did. He was content to be
misunderstood." 5 It was appropriate all around for
Jesus to receive baptism at the hands of John. It
not only avoided misunderstanding of one sort as
the Messiah began his work. It gave the Messiah's
sanction to the noble ministry of the Forerunner. It
set the example for all men to follow the teaching of
John and the example of Jesus. If Jesus had not
1 irATjpuo-ai ira<rai> Si.ko.ioovvt)v. Note aorist (punctiliar) tense. Every
righteous act.
2 Matt. 21 : 25. 8 Broadus on Matthew, p. 55.
4 Luke 7 : 29. s Bruce, " Matthew," p. 86.

REALITY 121
himself submitted to baptism, a powerful argument
against baptism by the disciples of Jesus would have
existed. The later command by Jesus to baptize
would have lacked the force of the Master's own
example. All this seems obvious enough. It is when we seek
to find the full significance of the baptism of Jesus that
trouble com^s. Some of the ideas offered may be
waved aside. The baptism did not consecrate Jesus
as a priest. He was not a priest in the ceremonial
sense at all. He was not connected with the priestly
line and was a priest after the order of Melchizedek.1
It was not a vicarious purification as the representa
tive of a guilty people. It was not the Messianic con
secration. The descent of the Holy Spirit was that.
It was not the public introduction by John of Jesus
to the multitude. Apparently the multitude did not
witness the baptism. All these views may be put to
one side.2
Edersheim is impatient with all such ideas. He
holds that Jesus had no ulterior motive at all. It
may be questioned if the matter is quite so simple
as that. Kirtley3 considers it to be the symbolical
fulfilment of all righteousness. That is certainly not
all that is meant, but it is possible that this idea may
be latent in the act of Jesus. Weiss4 urges that the
symbolical character of the act must be kept in view.
1 Cf. Broadus on Matthew, p. 55.
2 Cf. Reynolds, "John the Baptist," pp. 316 ff.; Weiss, " Life of Christ,"
vol. I, pp. 322 f.; Farrar, "Life of Christ," vol. I, pp. 116 f.; Edersheim,
"Life and Times," vol. I, pp. 279 ff.; Broadus, "Matthew," pp. 55 f.
3 "Design of Baptism,"
4 "Life of Christ," vol. I, pp. 322 f.

122 JOHN THE LOYAL
True, Jesus had no sins to confess nor to be symbol
ized by the act of immersion, but he entered upon a
new phase of his life-work. In a fuller sense it is
true that the baptism prefigured Christ's own death
and resurrection as afterward explained by Paul.1
In a sense, also, Jesus put himself on a par with other
men. The solidarity of the race was illustrated by
this act of Christ. It was, in truth, a vow of devotion
to the Messianic kingdom on Christ's part, an oath of
allegiance, as it is with all who are baptized. He
came like any other man and submitted to John's bap
tism, though the act did not have the same symbolism
for him that it did for others. It was, besides, his
duty to follow the command of God, as already stated.
This last is the only point made by Jesus with John,
though these others just mentioned may have been
involved more or less. Jesus was in no mood for con
troversy. He mentions the most obvious reason. It
satisfies John and he baptizes him in the Jordan.
This was, in truth, the climax of John's own work,
but Jesus did not submit to baptism for that reason.
The practical aspect of the matter for the Christian
to-day is that of the example of Jesus. If he sub
mitted to baptism, is the disciple above his Lord ?
4. The Sign from Heaven. — After the baptism
Jesus " went up straightway from the water." 2
Luke3 adds that he was praying. It was with Jesus
1 Rom. 6 : 2-6.
2 Matt. 3 : 16. Out of the water, Mark (1 : 10) has it, ix toO iiSaTos.
More graphic than Matthew.
8 3: 21. Lange (" Life of Christ," vol. II, p. 25) says : "Jesus had im
mersed himself by the prayer of the heart in the abyss of Deity, even
while He was being immersed in the stream."

REALITY 123
no mere ceremonial rite. He had no sins of his own
to be praying about, it is true, but he had the sin of
the world on his heart. The Messianic consciousness
of Jesus is a theme that has called forth much discus
sion. Jesus at twelve years of age revealed signs of
his consciousness of a peculiar relation to the Father.1
In the temptations which follow the baptism, as told
in the Synoptic Gospels, Jesus is fully conscious of the
mission which he has undertaken. It is not attrib
uting premature conceptions to Christ to suppose that
he himself saw a meaning in his baptism that was con
cealed from John and from us. In epitome, to him
the baptism foreshadows the tragedy of the cross.
"The extraordinary manifestations about to be re
lated thus become God's answer to the prayer of
Jesus, in which the sighs of His people and of man
kind found utterance." 2
It is a vision that Jesus has as he comes out of the
water. The heavens "were opened" 3; "rent asun
der," 4 according to Mark's more graphic phrase.
Jesus will use the symbol of the rent heavens to
Nathanael in his picture of the free intercourse be
tween heaven and earth through the Son of man.5
The vision was primarily for Christ,6 but John the
Baptist also saw it. "I have beheld the Spirit de
scending as a dove out of heaven, and it abode upon
him." 7 John carried that vision with him as a per
manent possession.8 He can still see, as he later
i Luke 2 : 49. 2 Godet, "Luke," p. 118.
'riveax&no-av (Matthew and Luke). 4 <rxi?op.eVovs.
8 John 1 : 51. ' Swete, "Mark," p. 8.
» John 1 : 32.
8 ™0«o,|«h. Perfect tense (punctiliar plus linear).

124 JOHN THE LOYAL
described it, the Holy Spirit coming out of the opened
heaven. This was the sign of the Messiah that had
been promised the Baptist.1 Whatever doubt had
lingered in the mind of John was now completely
swept away. He could ask no more. He had in
deed and in truth baptized the Messiah. It was a
high and holy moment with John, and the gospels
are silent as to his emotions. Perhaps it was for this
holy hour that Jesus had waited to be alone with John.2
This was the real baptism, that of the Holy Spirit,
which John had said the Messiah would bestow.3
Now the Messiah himself had received in all fulness
this baptism. "The contrast between this anointing
of the Messiah, this coronation of the promised King,
and the Herald's proclamation of the coming of the
Kingdom is remarkable." 4 With John fire is the
fitting symbol of the Spirit's baptism, or at least of
one phase of the Messianic baptism. But the dove
is the emblem of the descent of the Spirit upon Jesus.
Both points of view are true. The fire searches and
consumes ; the dove is gentle as the Messiah is " meek
and lowly in heart." 5 Though the heavens had been
opened suddenly, the descent of the dove was gende,
hovering over Jesus and then resting upon him.6
We need not speculate on the question whether it
was an actual dove or whether the vision just looked
like a dove. Luke7 alone has "in a bodily form."
1 John 1 : 33. 2 Plummer, "Matthew," p. 32.
8 Weiss, "Life of Christ," vol. I, p. 323.
4 Plummer, " Matthew," p. 33.
3 Matt. 11 : 29. Cf. Plummer, "Matthew," p. 33.
8 Weiss, " Life of Christ," vol. I, p. 324.
2 3 : 24. 0*b,p.artKCf> etfiei.

REALITY 125
That naturally suggests an actual dove. It is pos
sible, of course, that there was nothing visible to the
eye, that John and Jesus saw with the eye of the soul.
The words, however, naturally suggest a visible mani
festation. Symbolical visions had been granted to
Moses and the other Old Testament prophets. The
purpose of this vision was twofold. It gave the Bap
tist the promised proof of the Messiah, and it marked
the official entrance of the Messiah on his mission,
like the anointing of the King.1 This was the heavenly
anointing. Jesus was, of course, in closest fellowship
with the Holy Spirit all of his earthly life from his
very birth.2 The Cerinthian Gnostics held that this
coming of the Holy Spirit on Jesus was the descent of
the Messiah on the man Jesus. What is true is that
this is the official endowment of Christ for his mission.
It is a great moment for Jesus and for John. John
had said that the Messiah was nigh. Now he can say
that the Coming One has come. The hour of destiny
has struck. John has much to think of now, but more
is to come.
5. The Father's Approval. — John heard the Voice
out of the heavens. Indeed, in the correct text in
Matt. 3 : 17, the Voice is addressed to John : "This
is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased." This
is the form in which the words are spoken on the
Mount of Transfiguration, in all three Synoptics.3
There the Voice speaks to Peter, James and John :
"Hear ye him." In John 12:28 a third time the
1 Plummer, " Luke," p. 99. 8 Luke 1 : 35.
8 Matt. 17 : 6; Mark 9:7; Luke 9 : 35.

126 JOHN THE LOYAL
Father speaks in audible voice, but here it is for the
comfort of the Son, who has cried out for light. Each
of the three times the Son has been praying, and the
Father answers his prayers. The form of the words
in Mark1 and Luke2 is an address to Jesus : "Thou
art my beloved Son; in thee I am well pleased." The
form in Mark and Luke represents the Voice after the
baptism as spoken for the cheer of Jesus. That in
Matthew is for the benefit of John. Both objects
were accomplished, whatever was the original form of
the language. It is, of course, abstractly possible that
the words were repeated in the two ways.
The Voice is not designed to convince the Baptist
of the Messiahship of Jesus. That function was per
formed by the descent of the Holy Spirit. The Mes
siahship is not mentioned, but the Sonship. Whether
to John this meant the full deity of Jesus is more than
doubtful.3 We need not credit John with a developed
system of theology like that of Paul. But the words
will remain in his mind and heart and will help to
clarify his ideas about the Messiah in coming^days.
Now that he has actually seen the Messiah, the vague
ness will disappear, and John will have a positive note
of identification to sound. He will soon call Jesus
"the Son of God."
The Father has good pleasure in the Son. " Behold
my servant, I uphold him; my chosen one, my soul
delights in him. I have put my Spirit upon him." *
1 1 : 11. Note evSoKipra. Sort of timeless aorist indicative.
2 3 : 22. Cf . Ps. 2:7. In Luke a Western reading substitutes the words
of the Psalm.
8 Plummer, "Matthew," p. 34. Cf. Briggs, "Messiah of the Gospels,"
P- 77. 4 Isa. 42 : 1. Cf. Matt. 12 : 18.

REALITY 127
One can well understand how gracious words of ap
proval from the Father were to Jesus. He may have
had some natural shrinking from the formal entrance
upon his world task. The soul of Jesus will cry out
in Gethsemane, and even here the dim shadow of the
Cross may have come, the long shadow of the morn
ing. He had not yet turned to the people. How will
they receive him and his message ? But most impor
tant of all to Jesus at this juncture was the conscious
ness of the Father's presence and approval. Nothing
else really mattered if that was true. "Thou lovedst
me, before the foundation of the world." x How vivid
a consciousness of his pre-existence2 Christ had we do
not know. The day will come when he will pray
about "the glory which I had3 with thee before the
foundation of the world." Into that Holy of Holies
we may not go. But here is fellowship between
Father, Son and Spirit at the very beginning of the
Messiah's work. The heaven is opened, and it was
never closed for Jesus save for one brief moment when
the Father's presence was withdrawn as he hung on
the Cross.4 But Jesus can go forth in the strength of
this hour to meet the Tempter in the wilderness, to
meet the world which he has come to save.
John leaves Jesus. Or did Jesus leave John?
Did he cast another glance at the Messiah as he faded
from view ? Now that he is gone, is it all true ? We
cherish the smallest details of our great experiences.
The world is never the same for the Baptist again. He
1 John 17 : 24. 2 Cf. John 17 : 5.
• e'xoi-. Imperfect (durative). 4 Matt. 27 : 46.

128 JOHN THE LOYAL
has had his day, a glorious day. True, the people
still flock about him and clamor for baptism as before.
But there is a wistful look in John's eye never there
before. He is glad with a strange joy. Will the people
believe him if he unfolds to them what has come into
his life? That is now his task, to make plain to the
people that the Messiah has already come. He knows
full well what it will signify to himself and his ministry.
It will mean the setting of his sun. The people will
turn from the Forerunner to see the Messiah himself.
There is need for mental readjustment on John's
part. But John feels in his heart that all is well. He
has seen the Lord's Anointed. He was in truth not
worthy to stoop down and unloose his shoes. And yet
he had baptized him. That was honor enough for
any man. He had seen the Spirit like a dove rest upon
the Messiah. He had heard the Father's word of
identification. He had fulfilled his mission in life.

CHAPTER VI
TEMPTATION
"Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin
of the world" (John 1 : 29).
1. A Month of Reflection. — Jesus went his way to
the wilderness out of which John had come. It is no
invention nor artificial parallelism to which we owe
the wilderness preparation of Moses in Midian (forty
years), of John the Baptist in Judea (several years),
of Jesus in Judea (forty days) and of Paul in Arabia
(about three years). A period of self-adjustment in
each case was demanded and was wise. The baptism
of Jesus marked an epoch in his life. " It was the true
moment of His entrance on a new life. Past years had
been buried in the waters of Jordan. He entered them
as Jesus, the Son of Man; He rose from them, The
Clirist of God." J These words of Geike are rhetorical,
and yet they contain a large element of truth. The
baptism in water had linked Jesus in a formal way
to John's campaign for righteousness. He had ac
knowledged to John that he was the Messiah. The
baptism of the Spirit had set him apart for his Mes
sianic work. The Voice of the Father had proclaimed
him as the Son of God. He now had in audible words
1 Geike, " Life and Words of Christ," vol. I, p. 414.
129

130 JOHN THE LOYAL
the Father's endorsement for his work. So Jesus went
to the wilderness in the strength of the Holy Spirit to
meet the Tempter. No one can conquer men for God
who cannot first conquer the devil with the Spirit of
God. The devil stands between the Redeemer and
man. Meanwhile the Baptist goes on with his work. Ap
parently as yet the crowds know nothing of the great
event between John and Jesus. As there were, so it
seems, no witnesses of their interview, John took some
time for reflection before he made formal announce
ment that the Messiah had actually come. That was
a fateful word, not to be recalled when once he had
let it go. There is one thing that he must have felt at
once : Now that he had seen the Messiah, how did his
former ideas and statements correspond with the re
ality ? He had tried to expound the Old Testament
teaching concerning the Messiah . John probably made
a careful examination of this teaching in the light of his
great experience. At some points he probably found
occasion for revision of his form of statement. A
natural modification1 of his words would come, in
clarification of his vision, a widening of his horizon,
a deeper grasp of the essential elements in the Mes
siah's work. We shall watch his words. The apoca
lyptic language is less prominent in the messages of
John that are preserved for us after the baptism of
Jesus. The note of wrath and judgment had been
dominant in John's teaching about the Messiah before
that event. Now the note of love and redemption
1 Nourse in "Standard Bible Dictionary."

TEMPTATION 131
comes to the fore. It had not been absent before
(cf. repentance, baptism of the Holy Spirit). Now it
naturally is uppermost. John did not have to make
a fundamental revision of his teaching about the Mes
siah. It is rather a fuller emphasis on the spiritual
and redemptive side of his work. He may, indeed,
have been puzzled by what he had just seen and
heard. The truth was so much richer than he had
imagined. But John was not a man to dodge issues
or to hedge. With the new light in his possession he
continues to preach and to grapple with his fresh
problems. When he speaks on this phase of the sub
ject again, he must have a clear word and a sure
word. When we recall how it took the entire min
istry of Jesus and the coming of the Holy Spirit at
Pentecost to illumine the mind of Peter on the signifi
cance of Christ's person and work, we can have the
more sympathy with the struggles of the Baptist at
this period. The night was passed and the day had
dawned, but he was not yet accustomed to the light,
and more light was coming.
We owe our knowledge of the attitude of John to
Jesus, during the period following Christ's baptism, to
the Fourth Gospel. This Gospel assumes and im
plies the baptism of Jesus by John in various ways,
and once expressly mentions it.1 The frequent echoes
of the words of John in the teaching of Jesus demand
a connection of Jesus with John such as the synoptic
account of the baptism reveals.2 The attitude of cer-
1 John 3 : 26.
2 Keim, "Jesus of Nazara," vol. II, p. 273.

132 JOHN THE LOYAL
tain critics1 toward the Fourth Gospel makes some
men timid in the use of this book as an historical
document. But I do not hesitate to avow my own
conviction that John the Apostle is the author of the
Fourth Gospel, and that he wrote out of fulness of
personal knowledge, with the exalted spiritual inter
pretation of an old man who looked across the long
years to the first days of the kingdom of heaven on
earth. He has his own peculiar style and spirit, but
the historical reality is present, and the essential ele
ments of his conception of Christ occur in the Sy
noptic Gospels. The events given in John's Gospel
for the most part supplement those narrated in the
Synoptic Gospels. The description of the Baptist
given in the Fourth Gospel not only demands the sy
noptic account, but it harmonizes with it, fills it out,
interprets it, when allowed to have its natural meaning.2
2. The Committee from Jerusalem. — Farrar3 is very
precise as to the time of the embassy, fixing it "the
day previous to our Lord's return from the wilderness."
That is possible, of course, if Jesus came directly to
Bethany,4 where John was now baptizing. The loca
tion of this Bethany beyond Jordan, as already stated,
is unknown. It was somewhere on the eastern side of
the river, probably about half-way between the Dead
Sea and the Sea of Galilee. We do not at all know
that John had remained in the same place during the
1 Cf., for instance, Bacon, "The Fourth Gospel in Research and Debate"
(1910). Per contra, among recent defenders of the Johannine authorship,
note Drummond, " An Inquiry into the Character and Authorship of the
Fourth Gospel" (1904), and Sanday, "Criticism of the Fourth Gospel"
(1905). 2 Cf. Edersheim, "Life and Times," vol. I, p. 309.
3 " Life of Christ," vol. I, p. 143. ! John 1:28.

TEMPTATION 133
forty days while Jesus was in the wilderness. It is
more than probable that John had kept moving up
the river, having crossed over to the eastern side.
" Who art thou?"— -The news of John's work by the
Jordan had already reached Jerusalem, as we know
from the Synoptic Gospels.1 The Pharisees and Sad
ducees had themselves come in large numbers to
make a personal investigation of the Baptist and his
work.2 They had received a decided rebuff, but ap-
parendy did not make a hostile report concerning
John on their return to Jerusalem. These leaders
were manifesdy powerfully impressed by the hold of
John on the masses, many of whom had actually
come to wonder3 if John himself were not the Messiah
of whom he spoke so graphically. They probably
reported this perplexity of the multitude to Jerusalem.
It must be borne in mind that, so far as we know, the
scene between John and Jesus at the Jordan was still
a secret between these two. Neither the public nor
the rulers in Jerusalem were aware of the sudden new
turn in the whole situation.
It is not certain that the formal committee sent
back to John was directly from the Sanhedrin. Eders
heim4 is quite positive that this was not the case,
since such a question as the status of John the Bap
tist could hardly come before the Sanhedrin in an
official capacity. That is probably true, but all the
same the members of the Sanhedrin were the recog
nized leaders of Jewish thought and life in Jerusalem,
' Matt. 3:5; Mark 1:5. 2 Matt. 3:7. 8 Luke 3 : 15.
4 "Life and Times," vol. I, p. 309.

134 JOHN THE LOYAL
and it is quite probable that as individuals these mem
bers of the Sanhedrin sent the committee to John.
We do not know that the committee was sent from
an evil purpose.1 The motives may, in fact, have been
varied, though it is difficult, in view of all that we
know, to consider the deputation as wholly friendly.2
The Pharisees3 were the prime movers in the matter
of sending this embassy to John, though they shrewdly
managed to see to it that only Sadducees were on the
committee. "Priests and Levites" 4 alone were sent,
and they were Sadducees. The point was probably
made that "the colleagues of John the Priest"5
should be chosen for this purpose rather than the
rabbis, since the priests and Levites, if going alone
without the Pharisees, might avoid another denuncia
tion from John, and might, in general, be more ac
ceptable to him. The general term "the Jews," in
John 1 : 19, is introductory, and is explained by " the
Pharisees " in 1 : 28. The Pharisees were, of course,
the more numerous party, and often had their way
against their powerful rivals in the councils of the
Sanhedrin.6 The event justified this piece of worldly wisdom on
the part of the Pharisees. They were received with
courtesy and with frankness.7 They go direcdy at

1 Westcott, in loco.
2 Smith, " In the Days of His Flesh," p. 42, holds that the committee
was sent by the Sanhedrin officially. So Godet, in loco.
3 John 1 : 25. Marcus Dods, in loco, seriously supposes that the depu
tation itself was strong in Pharisees.
4 John 1 : 19.
5 Edersheim, "Life and Times," vol. I, p. 310.
8 Josephus, " Ant.," xviii, 1, 4.
' Smith, "In the Days of His Ilcsh," p. 43.

TEMPTATION 135
the point of their mission with the rather blunt query i1
"Who art thou?" "As for thyself— thou that ex-
citest the people and stirrest vain hopes [Luke 3 : 15]
— who art thou ? " 2 John had met this temptation
once before, when it came to him from the people
like sweet murmur of applause to the orator. But it
came in a new form, in a most flattering form if he
chose to regard it so. Here was a formal committee
composed of Sadducees and sent by Pharisees — the
very men whom he had formerly denounced, who
now seemed to imply that they were half disposed to
agree with the popular notion that he was the Messiah.
It was a wonderful tribute to John's power and
marked the very acme of his fame. "It may be re
garded as being, in some sense, a temptation of John
corresponding to the (simultaneous) temptation of
Christ." 3 With many men this supreme flattery would
have turned their heads. But John never faltered for
a moment in his loyalty to Jesus. The devil by flattery
and insinuation had sought to dazzle Jesus with the
vision of " the kingdoms of the world and the glory of
them." 4 Now this temptation to glory and power
not rightly John's had come to him through the me
dium of the official ecclesiastics, but ultimately from
the devil also. If a breach could be made between
John and Jesus, it would forebode evil for the king
dom of God. Two rival Messiahs would neutralize
each other. It was a temptation for John to allow
himself to be considered to be more than he really
1 John 1 : 20. 2i> tis el; The order in the Greek is interesting.
* Westcott, in loco. ' Ibid. 4 Matt. 4 : 8.

136 JOHN THE LOYAL
was, and in a matter that vitally affected the very
essence of his mission. If John had proven false nere,
he would have been false everywhere. It was a severe
test of his manhood, but he was ready to meet it.
"And he confessed, and denied not; and he con
fessed, I am not the Christ." % No formal charge had
been made by the committee. It was only a query,
but it stung John to the quick that he could be thought
capable of claiming to be the Messiah himself, espe
cially after his recent interview with Jesus. The rep
etition in the gospel here serves " to bring out the ear
nestness, almost horror, with which John disclaimed
the ascription to him of such an honor." 2 John puts
it positively and negatively. He eagerly confessed, nor
did he for a moment yield to the temptation offered
him. His confession, in short, was frank and cate
gorical.3 " I am not the Messiah." 4 John evidently
felt that he was in the presence of men who were will
ing to give him a dignity to which he was not entitled.
"We can feel what the trial was to take the lower
place in the crisis of highest popularity." 5 But he
took it instantly and with vehemence. John was not
a fanatic6 in any sense. It is possible that his clear-
cut denial brought a sense of relief to the Sadducees.
They would not then have to report such a claim to
the Pharisees with all the accompanying embarrass
ment. They had once cowered before the boldness of
this mighty preacher. "His confession had divested
1 John 1 : 20. 2 Marcus Dods on John, in loco.
8 Godet on John, in loco. Cf. Josephus, " Ant.," vi, 7, 4.
4 iyu owe etp.i 6 xpioros. 6 Westcott, in loco.
8 Smith, "In the Days of His Flesh," p. 43.

TEMPTATION 137
him of his terrors, and they might now deal with him
as they listed." * They press this advantage with a
question somewhat more imperious in tone : " What
then?2 Art thou Elijah?" What function do you
fulfil if not the Messiah? The committee probably
knew that John had claimed to be the Forerunner of
the Messiah. The Jews expected Elijah to come in
person, and this is the question that the committee
put to John. They do not ask his interpretation of
Mal. 4:5 ("Behold, I will send you Elijah the
prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful
day of the Lord"). The question later put to Christ3
about the coming of Elijah shows that John could not
have answered "yes" without being grossly misunder
stood. The promise4 of Gabriel had only been that
he would come "in the spirit and power of Elijah."
John is now in no mood to parley with these men,
since he has probably noticed their altered tone. So
he rather abruptly says : " I am not." 5 He will not
split hairs over the rabbinical refinements. They can
reconcile what he now says with his claim about being
the Forerunner at their leisure. "If people need to
question a great spiritual personality, replies in their
own language will often mislead them." 6 The com
mittee take his reply to be a denial that he is Elijah
in any sense. So they push matters further while
they have the opportunity. "Art thou the prophet?"
Moses had said : "The Lord thy God will raise up
>7Wd.2 ti oiv; John 1 : 21. Here alone in John, but common with Paul.
Cf. Westcott. ' Matt. 17 : 10-13.
4 Luke 1 : 17. 6 "*« «f". " Marcus Dods, in loco.

138 JOHN THE LOYAL
unto thee a prophet from the midst of thee, like unto
me." J Peter2 and Stephen3 take this prophecy to re
fer to the Messiah. But that was not the understand
ing of this committee. The Jews had a vague ex
pectation of some prophet who would usher in the
Messianic age, who was different from Elijah.4 Jere
miah was also looked for, while some expected "one
of the prophets." 5 The reply of John is bluntly
monosyllabic, "No." 6 His answer was shorter /each
time. But the committee will take nothing for granted,
now that the question is raised. They repeat^ their
original query, " Who art thou ? " 7 Here the point is
the office rather than the person of John that the ques
tion turns upon.8 They feel called upon to apologize
for their insistence and repetition. The excuse is
" that we may give an answer to them that sent us."
They then sharply ask : " What sayest thou of thy
self ? " So far John had dealt in negatives about him
self. The committee call upon him to make a posi
tive pronouncement about himself. There is a note
of triumph and almost of condescension in this query,
not to say a tone of pity. What was left for him to
claim now that he has made so many renunciations ?
But they little understand John. He is greatest when
he is most humble. His reply puzzled them and
passed over their heads : " I am the Voice of one cry
ing in the wilderness, Make straight the way of the
1 Deut. 18 : 15. 2 Acts 3 : 22. » Acts 7 : 37.
4 Cf. I Mac. 14 : 41; John 6 : 14; 7 : 40.
6 Matt. 16 : 14. 8 oS. > Tis el; John 1 : 22.
8 Westcott, in loco.

TEMPTATION 139
Lord, as said Isaiah the prophet." J It is possible,2
though not certain, that John had used this language
of himself at the beginning of his ministry. But it
adequately describes his true mission and relation to
the Messiah. In reality John has thus in scriptural
language claimed 3 to be the Forerunner of the Mes
siah which they had thought him to deny concerning
Elijah. John does not here mention the element of
judgment brought out before. For John the Messiah
had already come, and he did not now need the apoca
lyptic imagery.4 But the language of the Baptist was
too vague to be understood by the committee.
"Thou art to me
No bird, but an invisible thing,
A voice, a mystery."
The Evangelist pauses to explain that the committee
had been sent by the Pharisees. Perhaps they wish
that the Pharisees were now here to pursue this in
quiry further. Indeed, this explanatory remark points
forward rather than backward.
" Why then baptizest thou ? " — The committee rallied.
"They asked him, and said unto him." The question
is probably on behalf of the Pharisees, who were so
much concerned about ceremonial ablutions.5 The
Sadducees were more interested in John's claims con
cerning his person and office. The Pharisees had prob
ably already had secret resentments against John's
new rite, which they probably regarded as an inno-
1 John 1 : 23 f . ; Isa. 40 : 3. 2 Matt. 3:3.
8 Marcus Dodds, in loco. i Westcott, in loco.
6 Godet, in loco.

140 JOHN THE LOYAL
vation that bordered on the sacrilegious, since it did
not have their sanction nor authorization.1 "Why
then baptizest thou ? " 2 The condition which follows
enumerates in order John's three denials and assumes
that those points are now out of the way.3 The " then "
is significant. If John had admitted his identity
with either the Messiah, Elijah or the prophet, there
would have been no surprise expressed at his intro
duction of his new rite. As it was, by his own ad
mission, did not the Pharisees have a ground of com
plaint against him ? If John was just a priest, or even
a rabbi, of unusual and undoubted gifts and popularity,
there was no occasion nor authority for his challenge
of the life of the people and the institution of a sym
bolic rite which called a nation to repentance at the
Jordan. "The strictest guardians conceded, indeed,
to the Messiah, or to one of his forerunners, the right
of making innovations in the matter of observances." 4
If the committee expected to embarrass John with a
quandary, they were much mistaken. He has no
idea of making an apology for his baptism. That he
admits as a well-known fact. "I baptize in water." 5
It is so generally understood that John has no further
word on that subject. He does not seize the oppor
tunity to make an exposition of the difference between
his baptism and the ceremonial ablutions of the Phari
sees. That would have been in the spirit and to the
taste of the Pharisees. All men knew that John's
1 Ibid. 2 ti oSy flaim'feis;
8 ei plus indicative is a condition of the first class determined as ful
filled. Cf. Robertson, "Short Grammar of the Greek New Testament,"
pp. 161 f.
4 Godet, in loco. 8 iyi, /Scurrifu iv vSan.

TEMPTATION 141
baptism was a "repentance-baptism," but John does
not say so here. There is something to be said con
cerning the reason why he as the Forerunner intro
duced baptism because of its relation to the manifes
tation1 of the Messiah, but he will not make that point
to these men at this juncture by way of apology.
There is a greater and a more needed word to say.
He will speak that.
"In the midst of you standeth one whom ye know
not." 2 — There is indeed an implied thought in the
transition to the effect that, if they really understood
the introductory nature of his baptism and its relation
to the work of the Messiah, they would make no cavil.
But that is all by the way. In reality, John now
turns the tables on this committee who had turned
prosecutor, so to speak, of John and his baptism.
John now virtually says that but for their ignorance
they would not have asked him the questions already
asked. They would not have challenged John and
his baptism if they knew what John knew. John had
seen the Messiah, but he had not yet made proclama
tion of that fact. He feels that he can no longer delay
this great announcement. But it is to a now hostile
audience that John has to speak. However, his lan
guage is cautious and figurative. They had wished
to know about the Messiah. He has already come,
and they, the ecclesiastical leaders, do not know him.
"He came unto his own and they that were his own
received him not." 3 None are so blind as those who

1 John 1 : 32.
2 iiio-os iipMV orrJKet ov vpeU owe oXBare. B John 1:11.

142 JOHN THE LOYAL
will not see. To be sure, as yet the Messiah had been
manifested only to the Baptist, but his words are a
parable and a prophecy of the attitude of the ecclesi
astics toward Jesus when he does make himself known
to them. They will have none of him then as they
wish none of John now. The Unseen Christ has con
tinued to walk through the ages in the midst of men
who do not see him when he comes into the midst of
them. This is his indictment of the committee. But
he has a further word that bears upon John's relation
to the Messiah, a matter also asked about by the
committee. " He that cometh after me the latchet of
whose shoes I am not worthy to unloose." This was
language already used * by John in the presence of the
multitudes, and correctly describes John's own sense
of inferiority to the Messiah. "Every service which
a servant will perform for his master, a disciple will
do for his rabbi, except loosing his sandal thong." 2
Thus John has in his own way told the committee all
that they had asked and more. They had not under
stood his replies, and on the whole probably felt more
mystified than ever. The moment that they thought
they understood him he said something else that left
them at sea. We are not told the effect of all this upon
the committee. They are at last silent, whatever
their thoughts. Probably deeper questionings had
come to them than they had ever had before. And
what can they say to the Pharisees ? 3
' Luke 3 : 16. Cf. Mark 1 : 7.
2 Talmud. Quoted by Marcus Dods on John, p. 694.
3 Henderson ("Palestine," p. 154) thinks that "Bethany equals
Batanea (Bashan). So Conder. Then Beth-abarah might thus be the place .
where John was. But even so, Bethany is the correct text in John 1 : 28.

TEMPTATION 143
3. The Second Glimpse of the Messiah. — John and
Jesus have both come out triumphant from their
temptations, and they meet again. On the next day1
after the interview with the committee from Jerusalem,
Jesus comes to John, probably directly from his temp
tation. It is the first time that the Fourth Gospel
has taken a definite notice of time. The author seems
conscious that he is dealing with an epoch in history,
and carefully singles out these days as the days of the
Passion Week are described. In all probability John
the Evangelist was present during these important
days of crisis, and he has a vivid recollection through
all the years of the significant details. Apparently the
embassy from Jerusalem had departed without fur
ther inquiry concerning the One who was standing in
the midst of them. If they had waited a day, they
would have seen the Messiah himself, and have heard
John's witness to him. They may have been really
indifferent to John's figurative description of the
Messiah or have affected unconcern.2 But the in
quiry from Jerusalem doubtless created fresh interest3
among John's disciples, and there was probably a
buzz of suppressed excitement as a result of the
dialogue. (a) John's Identification of the Messiah. — If the
Messiah had already come, where was he ? He might
appear any day by the side of John. It was only fit
ting that the Messiah should receive public identifi
cation and endorsement from his Herald and Fore-

' John 1 : 29.
2 Godet, "John," p. 310. • Westcott, in loco.

144 JOHN THE LOYAL
runner.1 From every point of view it was natural for
Jesus to come to John. The private recognition al
ready received would not suffice for the people. We
may not attribute to Jesus an artificial plan of pro
cedure in his work as Messiah, but it was surely wise
for Jesus to give John the opportunity of doing as he
wished about the matter of a public identification.
In the circle of John's disciples Jesus would be more
likely to find a sympathetic reception. Once more
John and Jesus are face to face.2 We are not told
that Jesus spoke aught to John. But he looked at
John. " There was something unearthly in His look,
and John gazed at him." 3 The marks of struggle
and of victory were perhaps still on the face of Jesus
as he confronted John. Was John still satisfied that
he was the Messiah ? I pass by for the moment John's
great word about the Lamb of God. That is in the
nature of theological interpretation, and will be dis
cussed presently in its logical order. "This is he,"
said John, " of whom I spoke." 4 That is identifica
tion. John looks on Jesus5 with eager gaze and iden
tifies him in his presence to the crowd of bystand
ers. Jesus hears the words and they are gracious
unto his ears. John adds in the presence of Jesus
also that he is inferior to the Messiah. He does not
use the word Messiah, whether because of the political
meaning connected with that term in the minds of the
Jews we do not know. On the day before John had
1 Westcott, in loco. * ffpb5 abriv.
8 Smith, " Days of His Flesh,'' p. 44.
4 John 1 : 30. imep ob, in behalf of whom, vindicating his glorious
Office, WeStCOtt. 6 BAeirei tov 'Iigo-ouv.

TEMPTATION 145
said to the committee that this one of whom he spoke
came "after" i him. He now repeats that statement.
Jesus was after him in order of time, for John was his
messenger (forerunner); but he was before him in
dignity, office and worth.2 It is not necessary to
think that John meant the pre-existence of Jesus,
though that was, of course, true also. Marcus Dods
(in loco) considers it more than probable that John
did have in mind the pre-existence of the Messiah,
"a thought which may have been derived from the
apocalyptic books." But Jesus, as soon as he is
manifested, steps in front of John because of his
essential priority.3 The second "before me" really
implies absolute priority and is a remarkable expres
sion.4 It is a metaphorical line that John has in
mind, but a very real superiority is meant by John.
John seems to feel that he must explain why he had
not pointed out the Messiah before. The explana
tion is very simple. He had not known him as the
Messiah.5 John may have known of Jesus through
Zacharias and Elizabeth. But there is no evidence
that he had been thrown with him. What John here
means is that till he met Jesus at his baptism, he did
not know that he was the Messiah, and may not have
had any personal relations or acquaintanceship with
him. He had foretold the Messiah in general terms.
He had stated that he was near at hand.6 On yester-
1 John 1 : 26. oiriVw pvow. John is ahead in time.
2 Cf . John 1 : 15. Here also we have ep.irpoa&ev p.ov and irporros p.ov.
3 Westcott on John 1:15.
4 irpuTos p.ov (ablative of comparison with superlative). Cf. Westcott.
8 ovx jjSeiv avroV. John 1 : 31.
8 Matt. 3 : 10.

146 JOHN THE LOYAL
day he had said that he had come.1 He does not feel
called upon to explain why he had remained silent for
a month after he had met and baptized Jesus. In
reality no explanation was needed, as the time had
not been long. He may have waited for the return of
Jesus. But he does say2 that the public aspect of his
work of baptizing had to do with the manifestation of
the Messiah to Israel. He will presently explain that
he had seen the proof of the Messiahship of Jesus at
his baptism. It was, in truth, through John's work
as the baptizer that he had discovered the Messiah
whom he now proclaimed and pointed out. It was
the divine ordaining that had made it so. His pro
phetic presentiment3 at the first sight of Jesus was
confirmed by the sign of the Messiah. This was
another great hour4 in John's life when he was able
to point to Jesus as the Messiah. On yesterday he
had said : " He is there." To-day he says : " There
he is." 5 He had done his duty as he met it from day
to day in the unfolding providence of God. His own
ministry, like that of Jesus,8 had revealed thoughts
out of many hearts. The deepening of the sense of sin
on the part of the people made it easier for them to
grasp the truth about Christ's atoning and redeem
ing work, while the confessions of the masses were
rounded out by the self-surrender of Jesus.7 But
John seems to be deeply conscious of the fact that he
had not fully portrayed the riches of the Messiah.
The half had not been told. The reality had gone
1 John 1 : 26. 2 John 1 : 31 f. 8 Meyer on John, in loco.
4 Smith, " Days of His Flesh," p. 44.
6 Godet, in loco. 8 Luke 2 : 35. » Westcott, in loco.

TEMPTATION 147
far beyond what he had foreseen. "The gift which
John possessed, of seeing over and beyond his own
work, is one of the most remarkable, and can only be
found where there exist a rare self-knowledge and a
rare humility." x John was able to understand his
own relation to the world, a thing that few men can
do. He had a sensitive soul that responded to the
best and highest in men. He understood Jesus, a
thing that few men of Christ's time did. It was
glory enough2 to have baptized Jesus. Then he had
been permitted to point him out.
(b) John's Interpretation of Jesus. — I have reversed
the order of John's words on purpose. In order of
time his interpretation comes first, and then his identi
fication. But it was all over in a moment. It suits
my purpose better here to follow the identification by
the interpretation. But what John did was dramatic
enough. "When he came suddenly again into the
circle where the Baptist was standing, the first look
at him sent through the Forerunner's soul a revealing
shock; whereupon, with out-stretched finger pointed
at him, he cried : ' Behold the Lamb of God, that
taketh away the sin of the world! ' " 3 The words are
exclamatory4 and are not addressed to Jesus. Critics
like Strauss and Holtzmann reject these words as
those of the Baptist, on the ground that this sacrificial
view of the death of Jesus could not have been held
till after Jesus had died, and that John, or the child of
his age, could not have grasped such a theological
1 Stalker, "The Two St. Johns," p. 227. 2 John 1 : 32.
'Stalker, "The Two St. Johns," p. 229.
4 IBe 6 i.p.vbs tou deoO.

148 JOHN THE LOYAL
conception, since John's eye " never ranged beyond a
Jewish horizon." x It is an easy way to settle diffi
culties by " could " and " could not." The Old Testa
ment was open to John. He had spoken the day
before of Isaiah.2 Since the baptism of Jesus, John
would naturally make a fresh investigation of the Old
Testament passages concerning the Messiah. The
fifty-third chapter of Isaiah was open to him. The
older rabbis, "before the polemic against the Chris
tians had driven the Jewish interpreters to another
explanation," 3 did not hesitate to apply this passage
to the Messiah. " But he was wounded for our trans
gressions, he was bruised for our iniquities; the
chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with
his stripes we are healed. ... As a lamb that is led
to the slaughter, and as a sheep that before its shearers
is dumb, so he opened not his mouth . . . because
he poured out his soul unto death, and was numbered
with the trangressors : yet he bare the sin of many,
and made intercession for the transgressors." 4 The
mention of Isaiah and John's announcement on the
day before that the Messiah had at last come may
well have started talk between John and his disciples
about the prerogatives and general scope of the
Messiah.5 It is possible that John and Jesus may
have had converse about the real nature of his work.
before they parted at the baptism and after the vision
and the Voice.6 But it is enough that one with John's
1 Marcus Dods, in loco. • John 1 : 24.
3 Godet, in loco. ' Isa. 53 : 5, 7, 12.
8 Westcott, in loco.
8 Marcus Dods. in loco.

TEMPTATION 149
keen and penetrating insight had faced long and
earnestly the problem of the Messiah.
Some of the critics are hard to satisfy about John.
They find fault with him because he was narrow and
Jewish in his conceptions of a Messiah who would
bring only judgment and wrath. Then, when pas
sages like this are met which do reveal a knowledge
of the spiritual and redemptive work of the Messiah,
they are prompdy rejected just because they do not
give the deeper insight into the Messiah's mission.
Simeon is credited with prophetic insight into the
sufferings of Jesus.1 If he had that gift, why not John
the Forerunner? Who more than he was likely to
gain real knowledge of the true nature of the Mes
siah's work? The fact that scales covered the eyes
of the disciples2 on this very point proves nothing for
certain concerning John, one of the rare spiritual souls
of the ages. John himself will later have a time of
gloom, but that fact does not disprove his present
grasp of the truth. His specific mission was to " bear
witness of the light." 3 Jesus will say to the Jerusalem
authorities : " Ye have sent unto John, and he hath
borne witness unto the truth." 4 John had knowledge
of the truth that is in Christ not possessed by the men
of his day. Else he had no power to rise above his
time and teach it. It is puerile to try to put every
genius that arises back into the leading-strings of his
time. John shook off the dust of rabbinism and
blazed as a bright and shining lamp.
It is possible that by the term "Lamb of God"
1 Luke 2 : 25 ff. 2 Matt. 16 : 21 ff. ' John 1:8. i John 5 : 33.

150 JOHN THE LOYAL
John (cf. Isaiah) recognized the meekness and gentle
ness of the Messiah and the peril of Jesus as he came
into inevitable conflict with the generation of vipers.1
But certainly this was not all. John was of a priestly
family, and it was natural for him to think of the
lamb as sacrifice, in particular, the paschal lamb.
We do not know how clearly the language of John was
apprehended by the people who heard it.2 But a
man's knowledge of his words is not always to be
determined by the ignorance of his audience. In
Isa. 53 the idea of patient endurance and vicarious
sacrifice both occur. Both may have been in the
mind of John on this occasion. But certainly he had
that of sacrifice, for he says, " which taketh away the
sin of the world." 3 It is sin (singular, not plural),
"regarded in its unity as the common corruption of
humanity," 4 that John has in mind. It is the pro
phetic, not the legal, conception of Christ's work, and
John vividly describes it as present.5 It is the world-
conception of Christ's work also. John's horizon is
here that of the whole world in sin that needed a
savior. The Jewish Messiah is the world's Re
deemer. The boldness and originality of this inter
pretation of Jesus argue for the genuineness of this
testimony. John the Apostle heard John the Baptist,
whose disciple he then was, say these wonderful
words. They made such a deep mark upon his
mind that he never forgot them. John the Baptist
has grown mightily in these few weeks in his appre-
1 Stalker, " The Two St. Johns," p. 229. 2 Godet, in loco.
8 6 alptav ri)V ap.apriav tov k6o-uov.
4 Westcott, in loco. s Meyer, in loco.

TEMPTATION 151
hension of the Messiah. He has had great experi
ences. His mind was keenly alert to seize every new
item about the Messiah. That was John's passion,
the Messiah. He has come out upon the high plane
of the world vision of the Messiah's mission, But
there is a higher plane yet and he will come to that.
(c) John's New Testimony: "This is the Son of
God." — He speaks from experience. "I have beheld
the Spirit descending as a dove out of heaven; and it
abode upon him." l He can never get away from
that experience. It was the fulfilment of the sign
that God, who sent him to baptize, had given him.
"The same is he that baptizeth in the Holy Spirit." 2
John had, as they recalled, spoken of this as the differ
ence3 between the Messiah and himself. He cannot
doubt that day in the river when the heavens opened
and the Spirit as a dove came and rested upon Jesus.
John here assumes the baptism of Jesus as well
known by his disciples. Probably, since his mention
on yesterday of the presence of the Messiah, he had
told them the details of that great event.4 He sees
no reason for rehearsing the story here, but assumes
it as known, and appeals to the coming of the Holy
Spirit at that time as proof of the Messiahship of Jesus.
John has a holy confidence that is past all specula
tion and theorizing. "And I have seen,"5 he says.

1 John 1 : 32. Te#e'ajuu. He still sees that picture (perfect tense).
2 John 1 : 33. * Matt. 3 : 11.
4 Meyer, in loco. Cf. Edersheim, "Life and Times," vol. I, p. 337.
Keim has shown that John's preaching was steeped in the language of
Isaiah. Edersheim laments that Keim did not understand Jesus as well
as he did John.
8 Kaybt iupaxa. John 1 : 34. The vision is with him yet.

152 JOHN THE LOYAL
He is glad to repeat that point for emphasis. But that
is not all : " and have borne witness that this is the Son
of God." x We have no record of a previous testimony
from John to this effect. It was true by implication, to
be sure, from what John had already said about Jesus
as the Lamb of God. It is but a step further. God's
Lamb is God's Son. It is, perhaps, in this climacteric2
sense of the perfect tense that he uses the word, "I
have borne witness." He has come to the place where
he can say it and stand by it : This man Jesus here be
fore you is the Son of God. The Old Testament3 called
the Messiah the Son of God. The term in the Old
Testament does not always have its highest meaning.
It is used even of kings.4 In one sense all men are
sons of God. But John means only the highest con
tent of the phrase.5 It is idle to cavil that this is a
height to which even John could not climb. John
had heard the Father's voice at the baptism expressly
call Jesus " my beloved Son." 6 He evidently has that
fact in mind. He had pondered deeply on the signifi
cance of that voice. Now he interprets that message
to the people without express mention of the miracle
as he had done concerning the descent of the Holy
Spirit. Thus John has shown in his bold stand vivid
recollection of the two great miracles at the baptism
of Jesus. John has accomplished his work. He has
predicted, baptized, borne witness to the Messiah. He
has pointed out Jesus as the Messiah to the men of his
1 feat pepiapTvpipca on ouro? early 0 vtoff tov #eov.
2 Linear plus punctiliar action in the perfect.
8 Cf. Ps. 2 : 7, 12; Dan. 3 : 25. 4 Cf. Ps. 82 : 6.
6 Note the two articles 6 vibs rob tfeoB. 8 Matt. 8 : 17.

TEMPTATION 153
generation. His work is over. He stands upon the
top of the mountain. To go on he must go down the
other side. He will go on, go with a glad heart. The
Messiah has come and it has been John's glory to have
seen his coming from afar, to have gone forth to greet
him, to welcome him to his great work, to make his
path somewhat easier. He has made ready the way
for the King. Now the King has come. There is
naught for him to do but to step aside and let the King
have the highway. He will not sulk. He will help on
the work as he may. But no more will he call men to
himself. He will tell men to go to Jesus. Will they
go ? Are they ready now that the Messiah has actually
appeared? That question time alone can answer.
Will John live long enough to see the glory of the
Messianic days?
4. The Last Sight of Jesus. — There is an element
of pathos in the fact that John, whose life centred in
that of the Messiah, saw Jesus only three times. But
they were rich and gracious days and his soul fed on
the memory of them.
(a) John Standing and Looking at Jesus. — The day
before had been a great day for all. The hearts of
many were now full of "holy impressions, great
thoughts, and unutterable expectation." x On this,
the following day, there was the atmosphere of silent
waiting. John stood 2 with " two of his disciples,"
probably in conversation about the great events of
these days. They were the days long looked for by
1 Godet, in loco.
2ionj«i. John 1:35. Past perfect, but used as imperfect.

154 JOHN THE LOYAL
the Jewish people. Prophets had sought out and
searched out1 this time, but they could not find the
day. At last it had come. One of these disciples of
the Baptist was Andrew, as we are told.2 The other
was almost certainly John the Apostle and the writer
of this narrative. John the Baptist soon catches sight
of Jesus again and is filled with rapture at the sight.
" He looked upon Jesus as he walked." 3 It is a
beautiful spectacle to us, that of John entranced with
the vision of Jesus. But it was more beautiful to John
than we can imagine. His heart went out into that
look. He feasted his soul upon Jesus, who was to him
the one altogether lovely. The word for "looking" in
the Greek means a penetrating glance.4 It is the look
of the mystic, for John was a true mystic. Jesus is
not this time coming toward John. We do not know
that Jesus saw John on this occasion. But John sees
Jesus, and that is enough for him. He may not know
that this will be his last glimpse of the Messiah. But
he will drink in the glory of this vision.
(b) John Repeats His Interpretation. — He merely
says this time : " Behold the Lamb of God." 5 It is
not that John has changed his mind since yesterday
about the redemptive work of the Messiah. But it is
simply not necessary to give the whole description,
since these frequent words will call up the testimony
already given.6 John stands by his interpretation of
Jesus as the Lamb of God, with all that the term
justly signifies. Perhaps his remark the day before had
1 i£egfrn\{Tav Kat i^epavvrfo-av. 1 Peter 1 : 10. 2 John 1 : 40.
8 John 1 : 36. ep.J3Aeipa? tu "Irjaov irepiirarovvri.
4 Westcott, in loco. 8 John 1 : 36. 8 Westcott, in loco.

TEMPTATION 155
provoked discussion. It is to the credit of the Bap
tist that he was the first man to rise to the height of
calling Jesus the Son of God. He had penetrated the
mystical nature of the Messiah that far. "He was
dazzled with the mystery of this new life." J It was
not the Oriental pantheism that John had in mind.
He would not have applied these words to himself.
"In no loose or indefinite sense did he persist in the
conviction " 2 that Jesus was the Lamb of God, the Son
of God. This second witness of John is crisp and
pointed. Apparendy it did not attract the attention
of Jesus. It has been suggested that Jesus wished
to avoid the appearance of a private understanding
with the Baptist.3 But John has now twice publicly
pointed out Jesus as the Messiah whose coming he had
proclaimed. That is all that he can do. Jesus will
go his way and John will go his. Many a preacher
has had the joy of discovering a young man who can
really preach. But John has laid his hand upon the
Hope of Israel.
(c) The First Fruits of John's Testimony. — Ap
parently Jesus had been walking alone. As yet he
had no following. No one but John had avowed
faith in Jesus as the Messiah. Jesus had come from
the fierce conflict with the Tempter into the warm,
sympathetic atmosphere of the Baptist's presence. On
yesterday the heart of Jesus had been made glad by
strong, clear witness of John. But no one had come
out in open allegiance to Jesus. When would a be-
1 Reynolds, "John the Baptist," p. 360.
8 Ibid., p. 362.
3 Meyer, in loco.

156 JOHN THE LOYAL
ginning be made and where? Who will be the first
to own Jesus as the Messiah?
The two disciples of John had listened with eager
attention to the renewed testimony of their master to
Jesus. There is power in repetition. John did not
say that they should leave him to follow Jesus, but the
repetition of his witness might bear that interpreta
tion. The earnest look of John also added emphasis
to his words. They recalled what John had said
about his own inferiority to the Messiah, " the latchet
of whose shoes he was not worthy to stoop down and
unloose." They had loved John and his teaching.
But he himself had brought them up to this point and
now practically suggested that they go to the New
Teacher, who could teach them what John could not.
They were to pass up to a higher school, to become
the first pupils in that school of Christ which has been
growing in numbers and power ever since. The mo
ment of decision has come. They look at John again
and they left him and " followed Jesus." * They
made their choice once for all. "The circumstance
has a significance for all time. Christ's first disciples
were made by the practical interpretation of a phrase
which might have been disregarded." 2 They were
not driven from John, but were drawn to Jesus. It
was the positive attraction of this magnet of the ages
who was " set for the falling and the rising up of many
in Israel." 3
It was as it should be. The first disciples of Jesus
1 ^KoXovA-qo-av tu 'Iijo-oB. John 1 : 37. The aorist (punctiliar) tense
marks the crisis.
2 Westcott, in loco. » Luke 2 : 34.

TEMPTATION 157
came from the circle of John's followers. That of it
self was a comfort to the Baptist. He had not labored
in vain. He had come to make ready the way of the
Messiah. The soil was ready in places, at any rate.
The seed sown had now sprung up and had borne
some fruit. There were doubtless many more who
would follow the example of these two. " One soweth
and another reapeth," x Jesus will himself joyfully say
one day when he has seen a Samaritan woman saved.
It was a proverb, and it was true of John and Jesus.
It was with tender thoughts and a moved heart that
John watched Andrew and John, who was to become
the Beloved Disciple of Jesus, walk away from him.
The last sight that John had of Jesus was in the nature
of the triumph of Jesus. But there was no sting of
regret in John. He had a holy satisfaction in seeing
the two men leave him for what was better. They
had only taken him at his word. John will go on
preparing more soil for Jesus, sowing more seed for
the kingdom. John has done his work well at Beth
any, beyond Jordan. Some two or three years after
ward Jesus will be here again. The people will recall
John's witness and say : " All things whatsoever John
spake of this man were true." 2
"Jesus turned" 3 rather suddenly, for he had heard
their steps. Evidently Jesus had been walking past
or away from the Baptist. He " beheld these follow
ing" 4 him. He probably stops and says somewhat
abruptly, "What seek ye?" Jesus assumes that they
1 John 4 : 37. 2 John 10 : 40-42.
8 o-Tpoipew. John 1 : 38. Second aorist passive participle.
i deao-ap.evos avrovs aicokov&QvvTas.

158 JOHN THE LOYAL
wish to see him. The point is, Why do you wish to
see me ? In reply they say that they wish to go to his
present abode in Bethany and have an opportunity
for private converse.1 The matter is too grave for
brief conversation by the way. They call Jesus
"Rabbi" or "Master" (Teacher),2 as was customary
with teachers. The title does not mean that they
have already become disciples of Jesus, but that they
are willing to talk with him about the matter of his
Messiahship. They are willing to learn from him.
Jesus is gracious to them. " Come and ye shall see." 3
The comment of the Evangelist is laconic in its pith
and brevity. "They came therefore and saw where
he abode." Yes, " and they abode with him that day," *
all through that day. It was ten o'clock in the morn
ing.5 John the Apostle remembers all through the
years when he and Andrew spent that first of the
many glorious days with Jesus. There is nothing
further told of the conversation with Jesus during that
day. Perhaps it was too sacred for other ears. But
actions speak louder than words. "He findeth first
his own brother Simon, and saith unto him, We have
found the Messiah." 6 The leaven of the kingdom
was at work in Andrew, and apparently also in John
the Evangelist. The best proof that one is a disciple
of Jesus is just this, the effort to win others. We may
not follow this story further. The heart of Jesus is
1 Westcott, in lOCO. 2 'paS0ei, AiSair/taXe.
3 "Epxcotfe nal bipeo-de. John 1 : 39.
4 Kal irap'avTcjt ip.eivav ttjv iKeivqv ripepav.
8 Roman time, as always in this gospel.
8 John 1 : 41. Ebpyicap.ev rbv Meo-o-lav. He has made the greatest dis
covery of the ages. He can say "Eureka."

TEMPTATION 159
more than full of gratitude and hope. The beginning
has been made. But where is John the Baptist?
What thoughts are in his heart as he went on his way,
an increasingly lonely way, down the hill whose sum
mit he has now passed ?

CHAPTER VII
JOY
"But the friend of the bridegroom, which standeth and
heareth him, rejoiceth greatly because of the bride
groom's voice" (John 3 : 29).
1. John Still at Work. — There was nothing for John
to do but to work. He was no shirker. He could
help on the work of Jesus best by preaching and bap
tizing, not by quitting as in a sulk. He could tell of
the Messiah with new power now. While John had
been and was the Forerunner of the Messiah, he had
no disposition to make suggestions to Jesus as to how
to manage his affairs. He wished to give Jesus a free
hand to work out his own destiny in his own way.
The difference between the two men will soon be evi
dent to all. They both leave Bethany, beyond Jordan,
which " was no longer thronged by an eager multitude
hanging on the prophet's lips." J John, indeed, may
have been forced to leave because the rulers had
declared against him.2 Perhaps the committee had
made their report to the Pharisees, who were soon to
take note also of the work of Jesus in relation to that
of John.3 John's disclaimers about himself made it
easier for the ecclesiastics to assume the aggressive
1 Smith, " Days of His Flesh," p. 69.
2 Ibid. » John 4 : 1 ff.
160

JOY 161
against him. So John went on further north on the
western side of the river. It is not clear where " Mnon
near to Salim" was. Henderson1 identifies it with
Shalem of Gen. 33 : 18, some seven miles south of
'Ainun Springs at the head of the Wady Far'ah in
the northern part of Samaria. If so, he was near
Galilee in case the rulers in Jerusalem became ag
gressive again. "Many waters" 2 were there, so that
"even in summer baptism by immersion could be
continued." 3 The people still came in great numbers
to John and were baptized as before.4 As yet there
was no sign of loss of prestige or power on the part
of the Baptist save the open hostility of the ecclesi
astics. When Jesus left Bethany with the half-dozen fol
lowers, he went to Cana of Galilee to a wedding-feast.
At once it was manifest that Jesus was no ascetic;
that he was not going to remain in the wilderness as
John did; that he was going into the homes of the
people; that he would seek men and not wait for men
to come to him; that he would not hold himself from
the life of men; that he would the rather enter into
full sympathy with the joys and sorrows of men.5
News of this festival at Cana probably came to John
and would at once set him to thinking. Was he will
ing to take the Messiah as he revealed himself in his
actual life ? The incidents in Jerusalem at the first
Passover6 of Christ's ministry may have come to
1 "Palestine," p. 154. 2 vBara nokkd. ' Marcus Dods, in loco.
i irapeyivovro koX ipcarriiam. Imperfect (repetitive, iterative and de
scriptive). 8 Cf. Reynolds, "John the Baptist," p. 387.
8 John 2 : 23-3 : 21.

162 JOHN THE LOYAL
John's notice also. The breach between Jesus and
the rulers in Jerusalem now placed both John and
Jesus in the attitude of men whose teachings had been
disapproved by the ecclesiastical leaders of the nation.
John had been rejected as the Forerunner, Jesus as
the Messiah. They would have none of either. Jesus
is compelled, therefore, to go on with the work of pro
phetic preparation in much the same manner as John
was doing, " in some sort, His own forerunner." J So
he left Jerusalem for the land of Judea with his little
band of six disciples, and preached while they bap
tized.2 The place was probably down near the Jordan,
where John had once preached and baptized. Here
Jesus "tarried" some time, possibly some months.
The same regions where John had once done such a
mighty work are now the scene of the work of Jesus.
He is again reaping where John has sown. Jesus in
a real sense, therefore, takes up his work where John
has left off. The work of Jesus and John went on
pari passu.
" For John was not yet cast into prison." 3 This
explanatory note is made in the narrative of the Fourth
Gospel for two reasons. He soon was cast into prison
when his active ministry ceased. This phase of John's
ministry is not told in the Synoptic Gospels, though
they do mention the arrest of John.4 There is nothing
in the account of the Fourth Gospel to call for the ex
planation. He seems to have the Synoptic Gospels
in mind. He states what he does, not to correct the
1 Godet, in loco. 2 John 3 : 22 ff.; 4 : 3. 8 John 3 : 24.
4 Cf. Luke 3 : 19 f.; Matt. 4 : 12; Mark 1 : 14. ,

JOY 163
Synoptic Gospels, but to explain that the events re
corded by him here come before that event took place.
John alone records the early ministry of Jesus. He
here dates it, or, as it were, relates it to the closing
part of John's ministry. How long John labored
before he was cast into prison we do not know. He
may have continued a year after the baptism of Jesus
before he was arrested, but certainly not more than
that. It is pleasant to think of John and Jesus at
work near each other, pushing on the work of the
kingdom of God in the midst of tremendous difficul
ties. The religious atmosphere of Judea was cold
and formal, unresponsive to the highest spiritual ap
peals. Jesus was finding, what John had learned by
bitter experience, that he had to do his work in spite
of the religious leaders of the nation. In fact, they
were now the chief enemies of John and Jesus. The
two teachers differed greatly in life and manner, but
they both agreed in putting the chief accent on the
inner life of the heart and on practical, not ceremonial,
righteousness. In that matter they both incurred the
active enmity of the Jerusalem ecclesiastics.
2. The Discussion on the Significance of Baptism.
— At first it may seem strange that Jesus should have
allowed his disciples to baptize so close to John. In
a sense the discussion about baptism arose because of
this apparent competition between John and Jesus.1
The disciples of John start the question2 with the Jew.3
It is possible that they had challenged the Jew for
1 Godet, in loco.
2 S-rrrno-K. Cf. Acts 15 : 2; I Tim. 6:4; II Tim. 2 : 23; Titus 3 : 9.
' Correct text, not "Jews."

164 JOHN THE LOYAL
seeking baptism at the hands of Jesus.1 The Jew
may have ascribed greater efficacy to the baptism of
Jesus.2 It is more than probable that Jesus, when
his disciples administered baptism, explained how it
symbolized the new birth which they had experienced,
the death to sin, the new life on which they had entered.3
So, then, if this Jew was a disciple of Jesus, the disciples
of John, being jealous for their master, spoke in his de
fence. This was the first4 sacramental dispute, but by
no means the last. The term " Jew," however, leads
some to suppose that he was a Pharisee and hostile to
both John and Jesus.5 This is quite possible in itself.
But if the controversy began from some remark by
this Jewish caviller about the difference between the
Jewish ceremonial baptisms,6 the baptism of both
Jesus and John was soon brought into the discussion,
so that it became a triangular debate.7 The origin
and validity of John's baptism (he was not himself
baptized) had been challenged by the Jerusalem com
mittee.8 The Jew probably raised the question again
in an acute form. He probably "twitted them with
the decline of their master's popularity, telling them
of the stir which the new prophet was making in Gali
lee." 9 The relation between the baptism of John
and that of Jesus has been the subject of sharp de
bate ever since.10 The matter has been discussed al-
1 Marcus Dods, in loco. 2 Godet, in loco. ' Westcott, in loco.
4 Reynolds, "John the Baptist," p. 389. Reynolds, p. 392, suggests
that the Jew wished to stir them up against Jesus.
8 So Godet, in loco. 8 Cf. Heb. 6:2; 9 : 10.
7 Marcus Dods, in loco; Edersheim, " Life and Times," vol. I, p. 391
8 John 1 : 25.
• Smith, " Days of His Flesh," p. 70.
>° Of. Lange, " Life of Christ," vol. II, p. 327.

JOY 165
ready in this book at sufficient length. The point to
note here is not the merits of the controversy, but
the bitterness of tone which was manifested, as is
presently plain. All the elements of partisan feeling
are present. The intense conviction and prejudice
of the Pharisee met the warm devotion of John's dis
ciples to their great prophet, a devotion all the warmer
because of the rising of the new star on the Jewish
horizon, one whom they had come to feel was a rival
to John. To be sure, neither Jesus nor John was in
volved in the matter. It was the heat of over-rash
disciples of John and a Pharisee and possible disciple
of Jesus. But it is with just such inflammable mate
rial that the fire usually starts. The sparks flash and
the blaze grows. Can there come a cleavage between
John and Jesus ? That depends ultimately on John and
Jesus, and first on John, for the trouble was started
in his circle and is sure to come to his notice first.
3. The Effort to Make John Jealous of Jesus. —
There is the sting of bitterness in their words when,
probably in sore discomfiture1 at the hands of the Jew,
they come to John and say : " Rabbi, he that was with
thee beyond Jordan, to whom thou hast borne witness,
behold, the same baptizeth, and all men come to him."2
The recital of the facts is well calculated to stir envy
in the bosom of John. It is plain that these disci
ples find refuge from defeat in the determination to
drive a wedge between John and Jesus. The method
of their statement claims for John the precedence
over Jesus. He had come to John beyond Jordan.
1 Smith, " Days of His Flesh," p. 70. J John, 3 : 26.

166 JOHN THE LOYAL
"Every word was bitter or charged with innuendo." '
Reynolds puts this sharply : "He that was with thee
(dependent on thee, apparently a humble disciple of
thy message) beyond Jordan (in a better baptizing
place than this, on a grand historic site, at a moment
of thy greatest influence, when even the Sanhedrin
sent to examine and endorse thy self-assertions), to
whom thou hast borne witness (thus making his posi
tion dependent in some respects on thy influence with
the people), behold the same baptizeth, and all men
come to him. (Are there two baptismal communions
to co-exist? Dost thou approve of the course taken
by the new prophet?)" Every word is a poisoned
arrow. The littleness of these disciples of John is
shown by this story of bad temper. John had prob
ably heard before of the great work of Jesus down by
the Jordan in his old haunts. He had testified to
Jesus nor had he taken it back.2 They had, no
doubt, exaggerated a good deal when they said "All
men come to him." But they were putting it strongly
on purpose. They felt deeply on the subject and
wished to stir resentment in the breast of John toward
Jesus. It was well and good to be sensitive for the
honor of John, but had Jesus done aught to justify the
anger of these defenders of John ? What preacher of
the gospel has not had his special admirers come to him
with bitter talk in depreciation of some other preacher
supposed to be a rival of their favorite? The devil
had gone directly to Jesus for open combat. He came
1 Reynolds, "John the Baptist," p. 392.
2 $ o-A p.epapTupr)icas. There is an implied reflection on John in the
use of the perfect tense.

JOY 167
to John first in the guise of an ecclesiastical commis
sion, full of flattery and palaver. He comes again to
John in the person of his own disciples, who doubtless
felt that they deserved the highest place in John's
esteem by reason of their superior loyalty. They had
championed his cause against a Pharisee. They had
stood for John's cause against that of the new-comer
at the Jordan, who owed all his prestige to the gen
erous words, the too generous words, of John himself.
"The suggestion was that Jesus had kicked away the
ladder by which he had risen, and that his success was
at the expense of his friend. It was such a speech as
would have played havoc with a little mind and an
unprincipled soul. Never are the suggestions of self-
love so dangerous as when they are whispered in the
ear by the flattering lips of sympathizers." * Many a
man in high station has had his soul embittered by
the foolish talk of fawning admirers who, once they
saw that their envious tattle is relished, have a never-
failing supply of fresh gossip at the expense of the
great man's rivals. It is a severe testing to which
John is here subjected. " When for a lifetime a man
has stood on the pinnacle of influence, but at last his
day is over and another appears to take his place,
it is a miracle of grace if he is able to look on his suc
cessor with friendliness and genuine good-will." 2
Can John work that miracle? Will he be loyal to
Jesus now?
4. John's Noble Reply. — Nowhere does the Baptist
appear so well as in his response to the envious innu-
1 Stalker, "The Two St. Johns," p. 232. 2 Ibid., p. 233.

168 JOHN THE LOYAL
endoes of his disciples. The greatness of John rises
far above their littleness of soul. He performs a
miracle1 of self-mastery, and with serene lucidity
brushes aside their rancorous hints. He is genuinely
humble, supremely humble and great, as with pathetic
tenderness2 he passes by the cause of their dispute and
touches the really essential matter, his own relation
and attitude toward Jesus.
(a) The Hand of God Acknowledged by John. — "A
man can receive nothing, except it have been given
him from heaven." 3 Thus he meets the jealous zeal
of his disciples with a broad general principle of God's
control over a man's life. This is no platitude with
John, but his philosophy of life. The language is
general 4 and does not refer directly to either John or
Jesus. The critics have been much divided as to
whether John means to describe Jesus. " The greater
activity and success of Jesus was given Him of God." 5
Hence John has no ground to complain at the mani
festation of God's power in the work of Jesus. On
the other hand, Godet6 argues that John is thinking of
himself : " I cannot take that which God has not
given me." Godet argues for this interpretation,
since verses 27-30 seem to be a portrayal of the Bap
tist's work, and verses 31-36 that of Jesus. A plau
sible interpretation can be made from either stand
point. Westcott7 holds that the principle is applicable
to both John and Jesus, and probably was meant by
1 Stalker, "The Two St. Johns," p. 233.
2 Edersheim, "Life and Times," vol. I, p. 392
8 John 3 : 27. 4 aptfpwiros. 8 Meyer, in loco.
0 In loco. ' In loco.

JOY 169
John to have a double reference : " I cannot claim
any new authority which has not been directly assigned
to me; He, of whom you speak, cannot effectually
exercise His power unless it be of divine origin."
This is probably nearer the truth, though, as a matter
of fact, John would naturally make the application
first and mainly to himself. This general principle is
a sufficient justification of Jesus in his work of preach
ing and baptizing. It also shows that it was not
rivalry that prompted John to go on with his work
after Jesus had begun his ministry.1 From our point
of view the difficulty is that John should have carried
on a parallel ministry, but it is a superficial objection,
which disappears upon reflection. Some of the dis
ciples of Jesus may have wondered at the time why
John did not quit baptizing and give way at once to
the work of Jesus and enroll himself as a disciple of
the Messiah. "But so long as John saw that men
were led by his preaching to accept the Messiah he
might well believe that he served Christ better thus
than by following in His train." 2 John wishes to
make it plain that in the nature of the case there is no
ground for rivalry. " The message which was brought
by his disciples as a complaint, in his eyes crowns his
proper joy." 3 Success would not be success if it did
not come from God. He is not arrogating anything
to himself, when he simply receives4 what is given him
1 Cf . Marcus Dods, in loco.
2 Marcus Dods, in loco. ' Westcott, in loco.
4 kap.paveiv. Cf. Meyer, inloco. The perfect passive subjunctive (peri
phrastic), eav pjq $ SeSop.evov is rather awkwardly translated in the
Revised Version. The gift is already made before it is received, made in
God's plan.

170 JOHN THE LOYAL
from heaven as part of God's plan for him. Each
man's life is a plan of God according to John. But it
is only a great soul who can realize this truth in his
own life when the tide of success is ebbing away from
him. This is the greatness of John, that he can see
God in his life when the sun has begun to go down.
John was untainted by the artificialities of life. He
went straight to the heart of things.
(b) John Had Already Explained the Situation. —
" Ye yourselves bear me witness, that I said, I am not
the Christ, but, that I am sent before him." l John
not merely applies his general principle to himself,
but he appeals to these querulous disciples2 as witnesses
to his previous teaching on this very subject of the re
lation between himself and the Messiah. They were
mistaken in their zeal, and it was due to needless igno
rance on their part. They cannot blame John for
their error in the matter. They had heard him deny
to the committee from Jerusalem (or had certainly
heard of it) that he was the Messiah.3 He had also
expressly pointed out Jesus as the Messiah, and had
done it publicly twice.4 They had accused John of
having borne testimony5 to the work and mission of
Jesus. In so doing they convicted themselves of
knowledge of the fact that John is now bringing to
their attention. He had plainly said : " I am not the
Christ." He had also said that Jesus was the one of
whom he had been speaking.6 John reminds them
1 John 1 : 28.
2 ovtoI bpels. Emphatic intensive pronoun.
8 John 1 : 19-30. 4 John 1 : 32, 35,
8 John 1 : 26. s John 1 : 30.

JOY 171
that, while he has borne witness1 to Jesus as they have
charged, they are themselves bearing witness2 against
themselves. It is not a mere keen retort. It is a
complete answer and exposure of their bad spirit in
their suggestions. Certainly he is not responsible for
the jealous humor which they have exhibited.3 As to
himself, John repeats, what he has previously ex
plained, "I am sent before him." He is the Fore
runner of Jesus the Messiah. He claims to be no
more, but he does claim that. That is honor enough
for him. He is willing now to stand aside and see
Jesus do the work, if God so wills. Some men have
to be second in God's plan. John is second while
Jesus is first. He has no repining as he takes his
divinely allotted place. "There is nothing more dis
astrous or ridiculous than for the second, instead of
filling his own place and doing his own work, to be
pining for the place and the work of the first." 4
(c) The Friend of the Bridegroom. — " He that hath
the bride is the bridegroom; but the friend of the
bridegroom, which standeth and heareth him, re-
joiceth greatly because of the bridegroom's voice : this
my joy is fulfilled." 5 In the Old Testament the bride
is a familiar figure for the people of God whose bride
groom is Jehovah himself.6 The Messiah, therefore,
as the bridegroom is the highest manifestation of
Jehovah.7 This mysterious language about the Mes-
1 p.epuipTvprjKas. John 3 : 26.
2 p.aprvpelTe. John 3 : 28. ' Godet, in loco.
4 Stalker, "The Two St. Johns," p. 233. 8 John 3 : 29.
8 Ex. 34 : 15; Deut. 31 : 16; Ezek. 16; Isa. 54 : 5; Hosea 2 : 18; Ps.
45; 73 : 27; Mal. 2 : 11.
' Godet, in loco.

172 JOHN THE LOYAL
siah is in harmony with John's use of the phrase,
" Lamb of God," about the Messiah. John stands "on
the arch of the Old Testament" J in giving the inter
pretation of the system which he closes. Jesus him
self will later speak of himself as the bridegroom2
when the disciples of the Baptist come in company
with the Pharisees to complain of the disciples of
Jesus for not fasting. Once again, therefore, disciples
of John will be jealous of Jesus and his followers, and
will seek to fasten the clamps of an outworn Judaism
upon Christianity, but a Christianity from which they
still hold aloof. They will then be in company with
Pharisees, not in controversy, as here. But we have
no doubt as to the answer that the Baptist would have
made. He did practise fasting, but he did not seek to
bind Jewish ceremonialism upon the people. He
sought to make them really spiritual in life. Jesus
likewise uses the figure in Matt. 22 : 1 f . in the parable
of the Marriage of the King's Son. He is the King's
Son and the bride is the people of God. Once more
in the Parable of the Ten Virgins3 Jesus is the bride
groom. The figure is repeated by Paul 4 and John.5
John shows his knowledge of the Old Testament in
the use of the figure, and also his power in the use of
happy illustrations. The parable throws a touch of
beauty and of joy into the overstrained tension of the
moment. The bridegroom has6 the bride. He is supreme at
1 Westcott, in loco.
2 Matt. 9 : 15; Mark 2 : 19 f.; Luke 5 : 34 f . 8 Matt. 25 : 1-13.
4 Eph. 5:32f.; II Cor. 11: 2.
6 Rev. 19 : 7; 21 : 2, 9; 22 : 17. Cf. also James 4 : 4.
8 lx<ov equals has and holds as wife. Cf. Marcus Dods, in loco.

JOY 173
the marriage feast. " There is only one in whom the
people of God can find their permanent joy and rest;
one who is the perennial spring of this happiness and
life." J Jesus is the bridegroom2 and is entitled to the
happiness of the present hour. It is his hour of joy
and he is entitled to the jubilation which comes with
the setting up of the kingdom. As for John himself, he
is "the friend of the bridegroom." But that is no
mean function in a Hebrew wedding. He acts as a
"go-between" in the wooing of the bride by the bride
groom, makes the arrangements for the wedding and
acts as master of ceremonies at the feast.3 When the
bridegroom comes upon the scene, the friend of the
bridegroom steps into the background, but not too
far away. He stands " in the attitude of expectation
and ready service" 4 and listens5 for the further com
mands of the bridegroom. He has finished his work,
but he tarries to see if there is aught more for him to
do. There is joy in the ring of the bridegroom's voice,
and because6 of this fact the friend of the bridegroom
rejoices exceedingly.7 There is no alloy8 in this joy.
The full, clear joy of the bridegroom "causes the
heart of his friend to leap for joy." 9 John's disciples
need not think that he, the friend 10 of this bridegroom,
is jealous or unhappy over the news from the Jordan.
They have utterly misunderstood John and the whole
1 Marcus Dods, in loco. 2 o jo>p.<ptos sponsus.
8Cf. Buxtorf, "Lex. Rabb."
4 Westcott, in loco. 6 eorrpews. 6 aKovatv.
8 Bid ti\v Qiavijv Tow pv/t(ptov.
7 X"P? Xa'P"- Common in the LXX, but found in the ancient Greek.
8 Westcott, in loco. * Godet, in loco.
10 5 iblkos tov pvpuptov. Also called irapavvpubios, wp.tpdytoyos; the Hebrew
Skoshben.

174 JOHN THE LOYAL
situation if they imagine that to be true. Instead of
that he is shouting "Hallelujah."1 "This my joy
therefore is fulfilled." The joy of seeing my work as
the friend of the bridegroom so well accomplished is
mine. The news that the disciples bring of great
crowds who attend the ministry of Jesus fills John's
cup to the full. It is full and will stay full,2 in spite
of all their jealous talk. The song is in his heart.
What has caused vexation in them is precisely the
thing which raises his joy to the highest point.3 There
is no murmur to come from John at the success of
Jesus. It is in truth the very object for which he has
been striving all the time.4 Here is generosity, here
is real greatness of soul, a greatness of spirit that will
lead Jesus to call John the greatest of those born of
women. (d) John's Fading Light. — " He must increase, but
I must decrease." 5 " It is for Him to go on growing
and for me to be ever getting less." 6 Paley adds that
the language is solar. Dr. W. H. Whitsitt, sometime
President of the Southern Baptist Theological Sem
inary, and long Professor of Church History, once re
marked that in the church calendar the birthday of
John the Baptist comes when the days begin to shorten
and that of Jesus when they begin to lengthen. This
is true in the calendar, though no one knows how it
was in reality save that the two events were about six
1 Reynolds, "John the Baptist," p. 397.
2 Treirkiipiarai. This perfect is durative plus punctiliar.
8 Godet, in loco.
4 Stalker, "The Two St. Johns," p. 234.
8 John 3 : 30. 'EiceZvov 8ei av£dvetv, iu.i Si ikarrovo-&ai. The tenses are
present (durative).
8 Paley, quoted by Marcus Dods.

JOY 175
months apart. Marcus Dods1 denies that the arrange
ment in the church calendar had such a motive in
view. But it is a noble renunciation that John here
makes in plain language. It is said, not with the
spirit of unwilling resignation, but it comes from the
heart2 of the Baptist. The shadow will soon begin to
fall across John's path, the shadows of imprisonment,
suspense, martyrdom,3 but John will go steadily on
his way with an upright head so long as he may.
This may be the last word which we have from the
Baptist4 till doubt in the darkness of the dungeon at
Machserus forces a cry from him for more light.5
His sun will indeed go down, down into the night.
The darkness is nearer at hand than John probably
knew. But he has done a man's work in his short
day. His public ministry could not have been more
than eighteen months in length. But his sun has
blazed with brilliance during that day, "a bright and
shining lamp," indeed. He was no meteor, no comet,
but the bright morning star.6 He has seen the true7
light come, the Sun of Righteousness with healing in
his wings. He knew that he was not8 the real light.
But it had been his joy to bear witness9 of that light.
He has shone like the star in the early dawn. He has
hailed with joy the coming of the full day. Now that
day has come, he fades away. If these are the last

1 In loco.
2 Stalker, " The Two St. Johns," p. 234. 8 Westcott, in loco.
4 Unless the next section is from him.
8 Matt. 11: 2 f.; Luke 7 : 19.
6 " Fidelis Lucifer." Bernard says : " Lucet ergo Johannes, tanto verius
quanto minus appetit lucere." Cf. Marcus Dods.
7 John 1:9. 8 John 1:8. » John 1 : 10.

176 JOHN THE LOYAL
words of John in public discourse, they "are the full
ness of religious sacrifice, and fitly close his work, and
with it the Old Dispensation." x The law and the
prophets were until John. John is the link between
the Old Covenant and the New. His work is finished,
but it stands as its own monument. It can never be
duplicated nor forgotten. He formed the bridge by
which the first Jews passed over from Moses to Christ.
We are on the other side of Jordan now, but let us
never forget the bridge by which we crossed over.
(e) In Praise of Jesus. — It is a matter of keen dis
pute among scholars whether in John 3 : 31-36 we
have the reflections of the Evangelist2 or the final
testimony of the Baptist3 to Jesus. It is true that the
Fourth Gospel rather often glides from discourse or
dialogue into narrative in a manner difficult always
to determine the point of departure. An instance has
occurred in this very chapter of John (in the dialogue
with Nicodemus).4 Here it is not clear whether we
have the words of Jesus or the reflections of the
Evangelist. It is possible also that we have in John
3 : 31-36 a summary of the teaching of John5 which
may not have been spoken on this occasion. It is not
easy to give a categorical answer in view of all the
facts. The question of style can be argued both ways.6
The use of "the Son" and "the Father" is like the
language of Jesus at a later time, but John had heard
the Father's voice at the baptism of Jesus, and had
called Jesus the Son of God. It is possible that in
1 Westcott, in loco. 2 So Westcott, Marcus Dods, etc.
8 Meyer, Godet, etc. 4 Verses 16-21.
8 Cf. John 12 : 44-50. 8 Westcott, in loco.

JOY 177
this section we do not have so formal a reproduction
of the very language of the Baptist, but his words
adapted more freely to the language of the Evangelist.
The passage may be expounded as substantially the
language of the Baptist, but with an element of doubt
remaining. Meyer1 is quite positive : " We perceive
how the Baptist, as with the mind of Jesus himself,
unveils before his disciples, in whose narrower circle
he speaks, with the growing inspiration of the last
prophet, the full majesty of Jesus; and with this, as
his swanlike song, completes his testimony before he
vanishes from the history. Even the subsequent per
plexity is not irreconcilable with this, simply because
John is ' of the earth.' " It is not hard to see how the
testimony here given is possible from John's stand
point. He would, in that case, rise to a somewhat
higher level, but that is all. The Coming One is
"from above" as John knew from the Voice at the
baptism. He is in truth "above all," not merely
John, but all men. John then makes a still wider
cleavage between himself and Jesus. Jesus is above
and speaks what he receives from above, while John
is from the earth like other men, and receives his
message through the medium of men. "No man re
ceiveth his witness" sounds pessimistic in view of the
report of the disciples of John about Jesus. But John
knows that crowds and conversion are not synonymous
terms. The vast multitude of men in the first century
did not come to Christ. John qualifies his universal
negative in the next sentence. God had sent Jesus
1 In loco.

178 JOHN THE LOYAL
and had endowed him with the Holy Spirit without
stint, as John had previously said. The Son has un
limited power. One's attitude to the Son of God
determines his spiritual destiny. If John spoke these
words, they have a reference once more to the jealous
talk of the disciples of John. If they are the words of
the Evangelist, they constitute a warning suggested by
the last testimony of the Baptist, "the final peal of
thunder from Sinai in the New Testament." J
In any case we have no more words of the Baptist
to expound save his rebuke of Herod Antipas and that
one cry in the night from Machserus. It is with re
gret that we must continue the narrative of the Bap
tist's career without his soul-revealing words. In a
sense, John slips away from us now. We catch a
glimpse of him now and then as he flits past us in the
shadows. But we do not see his eye nor hear his
voice. The echo of that voice that was first heard in
the wilderness of Judea continues to reverberate. We
know that John was not idle, though he no longer
fills the centre of the stage. The very trouble that
soon befalls him is due to his activity, not to his in
activity. He was not the kind of man to sit idly by,
to mope, to lament opportunities for service now gone
forever. He was not an old man. He probably had
no very clear conception as to how the end would
come to him, nor when. But he will die in harness
if God so wills. In all probability the effect of John's
earnest words, his last public testimony to Jesus as
the Messiah, was to focus attention more than ever
1 Lange, "Life of Christ," vol. II, p. 332.

JOY 179
on the work of Jesus. John may have witnessed
more of his own disciples leaving him to join the
Messiah. If so, his heart was glad. We do not
know whether John's noble testimony was reported
at once to Jesus or not. He must surely have heard
of it in time. The light is turned down. The cur
tain is drawn. The Baptist bids us good-night.

CHAPTER VIII
PERIL
"But Herod the tetrarch, being reproved by him for
Herodias his brother's wife, and for all the evil things
which Herod had done, added yet this above all, that he
shut up John in prison" (Luke 3 : 19 f.).
1. The Sin of Herod and Herodias. — The story of
Herod the Great as told by Josephus1 is one of the
most shameful in human history. He was a man of
great gifts, which he prostituted to selfish ambition
and passion. At his death one of the worst of his
sons, now that Antipater was dead, was the one named
Antipas, his son by Malthace. Archelaus had a worse
reputation than Antipas at the time, as is shown by
the change in the plans of Joseph in Egypt on receipt
of the news that Archelaus is reigning in Judea.2
Archelaus was inefficient and incapable to such an
extent that he lost his position in ten years. Antipas
was Tetrarch of Galilee and Perea, and for a while
his country (Perea) afforded an asylum for John the
Baptist from the persecution of the Pharisees. Jesus
also spent most of his active ministry in his dominion
(Galilee). The vices of Herod Antipas were mainly
of a private nature. He became proficient in his
1 Cf. " Ant.," Books xiv-xvii. » Matt. 2 : 22.
180

PERIL 181
father's vices, " craft, cruelty, and licentiousness." x
It is his private life that concerns our narrative be
cause it is at this point that John's career touches his.
" In point of character, Antipas was a genuine son of
old Herod — sly, ambitious, and luxurious, only not so
able as his father." 2 Jesus will call him " that fox." 3
He needed his craft in managing the Galileans, and
made a political marriage with the daughter of Aretas,
King of Arabia, in order to keep away the Arabians.
On a visit to Rome to see his brother Herod Philip,
son of Herod the Great by Mariamne (the high-
priest's daughter), he fell in love with Philip's wife,
Herodias, daughter of Aristobulus (son of Mariamne).
She was thus the granddaughter of Herod the Great,
and had married her uncle, Herod Philip. They had
a daughter, Salome, named after the sister of Herod
the Great. Herod Antipas, also her uncle, proposed
to her that she leave Philip for him. She entertained
his proposal and consented on condition that he
divorce the daughter of Aretas. It was not necessary
for Antipas to divorce his wife, since " the Jewish law
allowed the king eighteen wives." 4 She would need
a divorce from her husband, but her stipulation was
doubtless occasioned by jealousy. The daughter of
Aretas found out the agreement and wrote to her
father, King Aretas, "to send for her to come to
Machserus, which is a place in the borders of the
1 Smith, " Days of His Flesh," p. 71.
2 Schuerer, "Jewish People," div. I, vol. II, p. 18.
8 Luke 13 : 32. " Herod Antipas — the pettiest, meanest, weakest, most
contemptible of titular princelings" (Farrar, "Life of Christ," vol. I,
p. 289).
4 Smith, "Days of His Flesh," p. 71. Cf. Schuerer, "Jewish People,"
div. I, vol. I, p. 455.

182 JOHN THE LOYAL
dominions of Aretas and Herod." ' This fortress
soon passed into the hands of Herod Antipas. Anti
pas was glad for his wife to go. She fled not merely
to Machserus, but to her father's home in Petra, and
the result was that Aretas became hostile to Herod
Antipas. Antipas went on and married Herodias, to
the disgust of the public. He had flagrantly violated
the Jewish law in this marriage.2 His brother was
still living and they had a living daughter. It was
indeed "a monstrous transgression, combining heart-
lessness, treachery, adultery, and incest." 3 The Jews
had now become familiar with wickedness in high
places. It was the Roman fashion, as was seen in the
lives of Julius Csesar and Antony. The old Roman
virtue in public men was gone. The Herods had
caught the fashion of the times. People were ex
pected to concern themselves with the public acts of
rulers, not their private morals. Once Nathan had
gone to David and said : "Thou art the man." Was
there a prophet to-day who would denounce a Herod
to his face for his sins? The people would talk in
private and lament the sad lapses in public and private
life. But the professional rabbis in Jerusalem could
excuse themselves by saying that they lived in the
jurisdiction of Pontius Pilate. Was there a voice
willing to be the conscience of the people in this
emergency ?
2. John's Denunciation. — "For John said unto
Herod, It is not lawful for thee to have thy brother's
1 Josephus, "Ant.," xviii, 5, 1. 2 Lev. 18 : 16; 20 : 21
8 Smith, " Days of His Flesh," pp. 71 f.

PERIL 183
wife." * The ground for this condemnation is not that
she was his niece,2 but the fact that Herodias was his
brother's wife, and his brother was still living and the
daughter also. Herod had put away his wife, and
Herodias had nominally divorced her husband Herod
Philip. But "Herodias took upon her to confound
the laws of our country, and divorced herself from her
husband while he was alive, and was married to
Herod." 3 Salome, the sister of Herod the Great, had
also divorced her husband contrary to Jewish custom.4
It was a Roman custom extremely common at this
time and is mentioned once by Jesus.5 The imper
fect tense6 ("said") in both Matthew and Mark may
indicate that John had repeatedly expressed the opin
ion that Herod should put Herodias away.7 It is not
clear how John came to speak on this subject. He
had not feared to upbraid the Pharisees and Sad
ducees (the religious leaders) to their faces.8 John
was not the kind of preacher to be blind to the sins of
men in high places (ecclesiastical or civil). He was
not a demagogue and would not appeal to the baser
passions of the people against men in office. He had
been fearless in the exposure of the sins of all classes
of people in Palestine. John did not keep his ear
to the ground for the applause of the groundlings.
Never was man more absolutely indifferent to public
1 Mark 6 : 18. Cf. Matt. 14 : 4.
2 This was also apparently unlawful (cf. Lev. 18 : 12 ff.). Broadus,
"Commentary on Matthew," p. 317.
8 Josephus, " Ant.," xviii, 5, 4.
4 Ibid., xv, 8, 10. 6 Mark 10 : 12.
8 ekeyev. Said repeatedly, had been saying. The form may indeed
be an old second aorist also, but the imperfect idea suits best here.
7 Broadus, "Commentary on Matthew," p. 317.
8 Matt. 3 : 7.

184 JOHN THE LOYAL
opinion in itself. He would defy a nation or a king
with equal readiness if occasion demanded it. When
John was at Enon, near to Salem, he was not far from
Tiberias, the capital of Herod Antipas. He was on
the border of Galilee. Did Herod Antipas send for
John to come and give his opinion of his marriage in
the hope that it might be favorable in order to stem
the tide of public discontent against him? That is
possible in itself,1 but on the whole hardly likely. It
is possible that the Pharisees in John's audiences may
have, from time to time, asked his opinion of Herod's
marriage in order to inveigle John into imprudent
remarks.2 If it was a trap, John was not afraid to
walk into it. He probably knew what the penalty
would be. It seems clear that John finally spoke his
opinion of Herod to his face. John was no frequenter
of courts3 and may have sent his message to Herod by
his disciples.4 But it is much more probable that
John went himself. Herod did later have frequent
personal intercourse with him.5 It is likely that, after
John had publicly denounced this marriage of Herod
and Herodias that he received a message to come to
Machserus to see Herod. The motive of Herod may
have been to overawe John and make him take it back
or to have absolute proof against him in case he stood
by the reported condemnation.6 It is hardly likely
that John was asked to come to Tiberias. He may
indeed have gone to Machserus several times and
1 Broadus, "Commentary on Matthew," p. 317.
2 Cf. John 4 : 1 f.; Luke 13 : 32. 8 Matt. 11-8
4 Swete, "Mark," p. 116. Cf . Matt. 1 1 : 2. s Mark 6 : 20
8 Broadus, " Matthew," p. 317.

PERIL 185
have repeated his demand that Herod put away
Herodias.1 There are always people ready to say
that a preacher is meddling in politics if he exposes
the sins of men in public office. But John did not
think of morality and public office as two wholly dis
tinct spheres. With him public office was not a
closed circle which he could not enter. The preacher
is the public censor of morals. It may be prudence on
the part of a preacher to be silent in the face of evil
conduct in the lives of public men, but it is probably
also cowardice. It is easy to retort that John ran the
risk of losing his head by his course, but the reply is
at hand. A preacher's head is not worth saving when
his mouth is silent at the cost of his courage and his
duty. It is not for the preacher to measure his words
when righteousness is in peril. If the ruler can with
impunity defy the laws of God and man, the common
decencies of life, it is idle to exhort the people to obey
them. John did not spare Herod. He dared to
look Herod in the eye and tell him of all his sins.2
It was a long list in simple truth. John laid chief
emphasis on Herod's adulterous marriage. He re
buked 3 him with point and force. So Luther, at the
Diet of Worms, defied the authorities. Knox faced
Mary Queen of Scots.4 Jesus himself one day turned
upon the scribes and Pharisees with a denunciation
the echoes of which will never die away.5 John had
refuge in the territory of Herod Antipas and now it
' Swete, "Mark," p. 116. Cf. I Kings 17 : 1; 18 : 1 f.; 21 : 17 ff.; II
Kings 1 : 15.
2 Luke 3 : 19. vepi iravruiv Stv iiroli)o-e irovrjpSiV.
8 eAeyxop-eiw. Luke 3 : 19. Cf. I Tim. 5 : 20.
4 Broadus, " Matthew," p. 317. .' Matt. 23.

186 JOHN THE LOYAL
had come to this.1 But how will Herod and Herodias
stand this open and repeated rebuke by the popular
preacher from the wilderness? The fact that John
voiced public sentiment in the matter will be no neces
sary safety to John, not when a Herod is concerned in
the matter.
3. The Resentment of Herod and Herodias. — One
day Herod himself "sent forth and laid hold upon
John and bound him in prison for the sake of Hero
dias." 2 Did Herod send up to Aenon after John?
A day came when Herod, prodded by Herodias,
would stand John's rebukes no longer. Luke3 says
that Herod "added yet this above all, that he shut up
John in prison." In Luke's opinion this was the
crowning crime of his career. It was Herodias who
cared most. Herod was a hardened sinner and man
of the world, more ready to give and take. The very
boldness of John in the matter had a sort of fascina
tion for him. At times he "heard him gladly," 4
though this was not his normal mood. But there was
no vacillation with Herodias. She " set herself against
him" 5 with relentless and increasing hate. "Herod
silenced the Baptist by sending him down to the
dungeons, and dismissed the matter from his mind.
Not so Herodias; her resentment could be satisfied
only by the Baptist's death." 6 But that was not to
1 Keim, "Jesus of Nazara," vol. II, p. 332.
2 Mark 6 : 17. Cf. Matt. 14 : 3. airocrTetAac. expanjo-ey tov 'Iwdv-qv (cat
eSyvev iv cpvAaKj).
8 3 : 19. 4 Mark 6 : 20.
6 Mark 6 : 19. ivelxev abr$. Cf. Gen. 49 : 23. Note imperfect (dura
tive). There is ellipsis. The phrase is curiously like the modern slang,
"had it in for him."
8 Swete, "Mark," p. 116.

PERIL 187
come as yet, for, though she desired to kill him, " she
could not." x The reason why she could not was that
Herod " feared John, knowing that he was a righteous
man and a holy, and kept him safe." 2 There is
power in goodness, and John awed Herod by mere
force of character. The bad fear the good whom they
affect to despise.3 Ahab was stirred to anger against
Elijah by Jezebel.4 So Herod was impressed with
the piety of John and regarded him as blameless in
his relations to both man and God.5 Hence, though
Herodias raged like a tigress after her prey, she could
not reach him. Herod kept him safe6 from her. He
was unwilling to put him to death, but he kept him in
prison. He could not denounce him to the public
while in the dungeon, and yet Herod allowed his dis
ciples to come to see him.7 Herod had in reality a
mixture of reverence and superstitious dread toward
John.8 So Herod kept John for a time from the mal
ice of Herodias. He seems to have made frequent
visits to Machserus, and really found pleasure9 in
hearing John speak, perhaps, about the kingdom of
heaven (cf. Paul and Felix). Herod was drawn two
ways10 about John. He had respect for John's good
ness and yet could not rid himself wholly of the evil
purpose of his wife, with which he at times partly

1 Mark 6 : 19. 2 Mark 6 : 20. ' Bengel, in loco.
4 Broadus, " Matthew," p. 317.
8 Binaiov Ka\ ayiov.
* o-werijpei.. Imperfect (durative). Perfective force of ow. Cf. Matt.
: 17.
7 Luke 3 : 19.
8 Marcus Dods, in loco.
9 ijfieuf avToG jjKove. Iterative imperfect.
18 A Siifivxis ""W (James 1 : 8). Marcus Dods, in loco.

188 JOHN THE LOYAL
sympathized. Hence he was "perplexed."1 When
driven hard by his wife's demoniacal vindictiveness
he would flee to John, who braced "his jaded mind
as with a whiff of desert air." 2 This psychological
tangle is not only of interest to students of men, but it
is intensely human and realistic. Herod could not
as yet make his way3 out of the tangle, but the Damas
cus blade of peril hung over John's head continually.
There came moments when Herod went over wholly
to the point of view of Herodias and gave way to his
own resentment against him. Then "he would have
put him to death," literally " wishing to kill him," 4
and be done with the whole miserable business. At
such times all that restrained him was the fact that
he " feared the multitude." 5 He had such spells6 of
fright of the people as all demagogues have. The
masses " counted him as a prophet." 7 There was no
way to change popular opinion of John. To kill him
would be to intrench him as a hero in the minds and
hearts of the people and to enrage them still more
against Herod. Even the Jewish religious leaders
quailed before the reputation of John at a later time.8
There is thus no real conflict between the motive
given by Mark (respect for John) and that pre
sented by Matthew (fear of the people). Herod was
i fa-opei correct text (Mark 6 : 20), not eiroiei (Text. Receptus). Herod
did do many things, but his perplexity is the point here. Note im
perfect tense.
2 Swete, "Mark," p. 117.
8 rjirbpei from diropew equals lose one's way.
4 dekiov abrbv airoKTetvai. Matt. 14:4. Note aorist (punctiliar) airoKTetrai.
6 Matt. 14 : 4.
3 ecpo8i|,»i), aorist (punctiliar) tense.
7 us irpo^ijnji/ abrbv elxov. Note imperfect tense (durative).
8 Matt. 21 : 25-27, 32.

PERIL 189
influenced by both at different times, in different
moods. So John is left to languish in the prison at Ma
chserus. The fortress is mentioned by Josephus :%
"Accordingly he was sent a prisoner, out of Herod's
suspicious temper, to Machserus, the castle I before
mentioned." Josephus2 also gives a description of
this powerful fortress. This interesting description
by Josephus has been confirmed by recent explora
tions.3 It is on the eastern side of the Dead Sea
toward the northern end, about seven miles from the
sea. It was first fortified by one of the Maccabean
princes about 100 B. C, then destroyed by the Romans,
and rebuilt by Herod the Great.4 It had for a time
been held by Aretas, the King of Arabia, whose
daughter Herod Antipas had divorced, but now it
belonged again to Antipas. The fortress was on a
high mountain loftier than those around Jerusalem.
The citadel crowned a conical hill which was impreg
nable. Tristram found two dungeons in the ruins,
in one of which John the Baptist was surely placed.
They were dark and cold and dank like the inner
prison5 of Philippi in which Paul and Silas were con
fined, or the Mamertine Prison in Rome in which
Paul was probably held during his second Roman
imprisonment in loneliness and cold.6 Near Machse
rus were springs, Callirrhoe, and it may have been
1 " Ant.," xviii, 5, 2. 2 "War," vii, 6, 1.
3Cf. Tristram, "Land of Moab" (1873); Schuerer, "Jewish People,"
div. I, vol. II, p. 250; G. A. Smith, "Historical Geography of Palestine,"
pp. 569 f.
4 Broadus, " Commentary on Matthew," p. 316.
8 Acts 16 : 24. 6 II Tim. 4 : 10, 13, 21.

190 JOHN THE LOYAL
these springs that drew Herod Antipas, like his father
before him, to Machserus. But we must leave John
" in that remote and hopeless imprisonment, in one of
those deep and dark dungeons which were so cold in
winter and so hot in summer." 1 Here for about a
year he is left. He has occasional visits from his
followers who tell him bits of news from the outside
world, with now and then a word about Jesus, the
Messiah, whom he had announced, baptized and
identified.2 How strange a world it was now to John!
Gone the great crowds that hung upon his words in
the wilderness; gone the excitement and the enthu
siasm of those wonderful days. Will the Messiah not
set the Forerunner free?
4. The Hand of the Pharisees. — We must retrace
our steps a bit. In the Synoptic Gospels we have
only the personal aspects of the controversy between
Herod (and Herodias) and John. But the Fourth
Gospel 3 has a clear implication that the Pharisees had
a hand in the arrest of John the Baptist, " when there
fore the Lord knew that the Pharisees had heard that
Jesus was making and baptizing more disciples than
John." Jesus therefore left Judea to go into Galilee,
not because he was afraid of Herod Antipas. Galilee
was the country of Herod Antipas. Matthew4 states
that Jesus withdrew into Galilee "when he heard
that John was delivered up." That was sad news for
Jesus. Machserus was not far from the wilderness
of Judea where Jesus was. Herod Antipas as yet had
1 Broadus, "Matthew," p. 316. 2 Broadus, "Matthew," p. 197.
8 John 4 : 1 f. 4 4 : 12.

PERIL 191
no reason to be hostile to Jesus. His hatred of John
was a personal matter. He did not interfere with John
because of his religious activity. But the Pharisees
were already opposed to Jesus1 as to John. The
Pharisees might incite Herod against Jesus. They
will later seek to get Christ into some sort of entangle
ment with Herod Antipas.2 Jesus is suspicious of the
Pharisees and concludes to make Galilee the scene of
his ministry so as to get some distance from Jerusalem,
the head-quarters of the Pharisees. Perhaps the dis
ciples of Jesus had brought reports of remarks made
by the Pharisees that Jesus was no better than John.
They had carried their point with him and Jesus had
better look out. The action of Jesus is not due to
unmanly fear. His hour has not come. His work is
not done. He cannot afford to be rash. The work
of the kingdom needs him. The Pharisees are in
reality now afraid that Jesus, in view of his success,
which is surpassing that of John, may prove to be
more formidable than John himself.3 John appar
ently had more points of contact with the Pharisees
than Jesus.4 John had come to them "in the way
of righteousness,"5 but it was real, not ceremonial,
righteousness with John. Besides, the Pharisees had
resented John's baptizing.6 At the time of the arrest
of John he had on the whole been more popular than
Jesus, and for a longer time. The rising tide of
Christ's popularity had come to John's disciples and
thus to John, but not to the Pharisees in Jerusalem.
» John 2 : 13-22. 2 Luke 13 :31 ff.
8 Godet, "John," p. 417. ' Westcott, " John," in loco.
8 Matt. 21 : 32. 8 Cf. John 1 : 25.

192 JOHN THE LOYAL
They were still more indignant at John, who had
called them "a brood of vipers." That word had
stuck and stung. Herod " had sent forth and had laid
hold upon John." 1 It is entirely possible that the
Pharisees had assisted in the arrest of John. They
may have done more. It may have been the Pharisees
who sent the first word to Herod about John's de
nunciation of his marriage, not that they approved it,
but in order to get John into trouble. They are en
tirely capable of such tactics, as we know from their
conduct in connection with Jesus and Herod Antipas.2
The anger of the Pharisees toward John may have
been greatly increased because of their growing dis
like of Jesus and John's public endorsement of him
as the Coming One. The Pharisees were responsible
for the withdrawal of Jesus from the Jordan to Gali
lee. " We venture the suggestion that the imprison
ment of the Baptist, although occasioned by his out
spoken rebuke of Herod, was in great part due to the
intrigues of the Pharisees." 3 The Pharisees took ad
vantage of the personal resentment of Herod and
Herodias to even up old scores of their own against
John. 5. The Political Excuse. — Josephus4 gives another
version of the arrest of John which some writers have
thought to be inconsistent with that found in the Sy
noptic Gospels. Josephus says : " Herod, who feared
lest the great influence John had over the people
might put it into his power and inclination to raise a
1 Mark 6 : 17. 2 Luke 13 : 31 ff.
3 Edersheim, " Life and Times," vol. I, p. 393.
4 " Ant.," xviii, 5, 2.

PERIL 193
rebellion (for they seemed ready to do anything he
should advise) thought it best, by putting him to
death, to prevent any mischief he might cause, and
not bring himself into difficulties, by sparing a man who
might make him repent of it when it should be too late."
It may be that Josephus has here told what is true
about Herod. Matthew1 says that Herod "feared the
multitude," and the narrative in Josephus may well
be one aspect of that fear. His fear of John's power
grew out of the fact that the people regarded him as a
prophet. Josephus would naturally give the public
aspect of the matter, while the Synoptic Gospels tell
the inside facts. The Josephus narrative gives the
excuse that Herod would offer for the arrest of John.
He was a dangerous man, too dangerous to be al
lowed further liberty. The great crowds and the ex
citement up and down the Jordan bore witness to
that fact. He had, besides, preached much about a
kingdom that was at hand, and the popular mind
was in an inflammable state and likely to burst into
a conflagration at any moment. Herod could thus tell
a plausible story to the public and to Csesar for his
treatment of John, if Csesar cared to know. But
Herod knew, if Josephus did not, that all this was
mere excuse. The Pharisees may, indeed, have helped
on this kind of talk. It was thus a threefold cord
that was thrown around John (personal resentment,
religious prejudice, political apprehension). John did
have power enough with the people to stir them to
rebellion against Herod for his licentious marriage.
' 14 : 5.

194 JOHN THE LOYAL
There was an element of truth in all three motives.
The trouble came out of the personal resentment, but
the religious aspect of it would easily lead to political
excitement. The various motives are not at all in
consistent.1 The heart of the matter is given in the
Synoptic Gospels. John had hit Herod hard, had
touched a sore place. There is nothing more terrible
than the wrath of an evil woman, especially if she is a
woman of ability. Herodias cared naught for Herod's
political excuses and palaver. He could talk in that
manner if he wished. She had a grudge against John
that she could never forgive. It burned on steadily
with unceasing energy. She was implacable. She
watched the moods of Herod. She watched and
counted the days. A convenient2 day will come round
some time. She can afford to wait. The life of John
hangs on the failure of this woman with her vacillat
ing husband. That is to say, it hangs by a slender
thread. She knows no such word as " fail." In the
end she will have her way or Herod will answer for
the refusal. It is a strange providence that has
brought the will of this imperious adulteress against
the life of John the Baptist, the brave and pure spirit
of the hills, who fears not priest nor rabbi nor soldier
nor publican nor tetrarch nor woman. He is caught
in the coils of Herodias.
¦So Schuerer, "Jewish People," div. II, vol. II, p. 25. Sollertinsky
(Journal of Theol. Studies, I, 507) shows that in regard to Herod Antipas
we are bound to consider Josephus's statements with care. Cf. Tasker
on John the Baptist, in " Hastings's One Volume Dictionary "
2 Mark 6: 21.

CHAPTER IX
GLOOM
"Art thou he that cometh, or look we for another?"
(Matt. 11 : 2).
1. The Clouds of Doubt. — John had been carried to
Machserus a prisoner.1 He was bound in prison.2
We do not know what John thought of this sudden
checking of his work as he went up the lonely bridle
path that led up the only side of the heights of Ma
chserus that was at all accessible. He doubtless
knew that it was the bitter hatred of Herodias that
was primarily responsible for his arrest. How long
would he be kept in confinement here ? It is one of
the comforts of life that we do not always know what
is ahead of us. As we go into the darkness we become
accustomed to it. It is a mercy not always to know
how near the darkness is nor how black it will be nor
how hopeless we shall feel. Edersheim3 imagines the
Baptist on the summit of the mountain and looking
westward. He is three thousand eight hundred feet
above the Dead Sea. Beneath him lies the Jordan,
hallowed with blessed memories of repentance, con
fession and baptismal vows. He has seen the light of a
new life shine in many faces there. Memories of his
¦ Mark 6 : 17. 2 Ibid.
8 "Life and Times," vol. I, pp. 660 f.
195

196 JOHN THE LOYAL
preaching sweep up and down the Jordan and back into
the wilderness of Judea. He would think of the years
of waiting and of growth in the hills. Many of his old
haunts could be seen along this crag or that wady.
Yonder to the south-west is Hebron, and farther to the
north lies Bethlehem. His own home in the Hill Country
may have caught his eye; at least the general location
is visible. The years have not been many since his
glad childhood days in the hills. John is now only
some thirty-two or thirty-three years old. Zacharias
and Elizabeth have not lived to see their son a prisoner,
but he is not ashamed. He is a prisoner for truth
and righteousness, for loyalty to duty, for fidelity to
man and to God. Perhaps he casts another glance
upon the Jordan. There was the spot where he had
baptized Jesus; where he had seen the vision of the
descent of the Holy Spirit like a dove; where he had
heard the voice of God proclaim Jesus as his Beloved
Son. Farther up on this side of Jordan was Bethany,
where he had twice seen and identified Jesus as the
Lamb of God, the Son of God, the Messiah that was
to come. It was a comfort to John to know that he
had lived to see the actual coming of the Messiah.
That was the goal of his life. He had not lived in
vain. His words had come true. He was vindicated
before men as the Herald of the Messiah. He had
done his duty in denouncing Herod and Herodias.
Prophets before him had won disfavor by their cour
age and loyalty to truth. There was Nathan, there
was Elijah, there was Jeremiah, there was Daniel.
John was determined to be a man, come what may.

GLOOM 197
God ruled and he was in God's work. Besides, the
Messiah himself was now on earth, and he was the
Messiah's Forerunner.
So John was led down into one of the dungeons of
the castle. There was no trial, for Herod's will was
law in such matters. There was no chance of escape,
nor would escape have amounted to anything in the
temper of Herod Antipas and his wife. John was
not wholly cut off from the outside world. Herod and
Herodias came and went and frequently sent for John
to come up to the upper rooms of the castle where he
" heard him gladly." 1 At such times John doubtless
caught a brief glimpse of the outside world through
openings in the castle walls. John came to exercise
a curious power2 over Herod, but not over Herodias.
" It is a sign, such as has no parallel, of John's great
ness, of the impressions he could produce in the soul
of this not merely weak, but characterless man; of his
power to awaken whatever nobility, whatever serious
struggle of good against evil was possible in such a
case, a power which the Man of God himself could
bring to bear on the very stones of the wilderness.
Thus, then, alarm and irresolution, conscious guilt and
esteem worked together to secure the Baptist his life
for a while longer, until the rancorous woman, whose
removal John demanded, by stealth obtained the goal
which her tempestuous wrath "had striven in vain to
reach." 3 It was then a duel between John and Hero
dias, if one may so say. Geike4 understands the words
1 Mark 6 : 20. 2 Mark 6 : 19 f.
8 Keim, "Jesus of Nazara," vol. II, p. 345.
4 "Life and Words of Jesus," vol. I, p. 420.

198 JOHN THE LOYAL
of Jesus in Matt. 17 : 12 ("And they knew him not,
but did unto him whatsoever they would") to mean
that Herod and Herodias mistreated John in all sorts
of ways. The words "point to torture, insult, and
ill-treatment. The spirit that called for the blind
Samson to be brought from his prison to make sport
before the Philistine lords, was still in full vigor."
The words of themselves1 are capable of that meaning,
and certainly Herodias is capable of anything mean.
But the usual application among expositors is to the
death of John, the final outcome rather than a long
process of torture. Mark2 expressly says that Herod
kept John safe, but that after all means only safe from
death, not from insult at the hands of Herodias. John
doubtless knew every moment that Herodias watched
or had watched his every movement.3
John had one crumb of comfort. His disciples
were allowed to come and see him.4 The disciples of
John did not at once disband. They are doubtless
dazed by the blow that has come to the Master; some
of them may have felt that they were justified in the
complaint that they had made to him about the
greater success of Jesus; they may have imagined that
somehow Jesus was partly responsible for the sad
predicament of John. It had all turned out worse
than they had feared. Jesus was the popular hero
and was now in the full tide of success in his Galilean
ministry. Many of the disciples of John had already
gone to Jesus with the advice and approval of John.
1 aAAa inoiijoav iv avr£ baa ri&ek-rtaav.
2 6 : 20. 3 Mark 6:19. « Luke 7 : 18.

GLOOM 199
Now that John's voice is no longer heard along the
Jordan, the crowds have all flocked to Galilee to hear
the new prophet there; one with an even more wonder
ful message than John had; one who does marvellous
cures; one whom many claim to be the very Messsiah
himself. A feeling of bitterness would gradually come
into the hearts of some of John's disciples. They could
pray, for John had his disciples to pray.1 John taught
his disciples to fast as the Pharisees did. Perhaps at
first unconsciously the disciples of John, forgetful or
oblivious of the fact that the Pharisees were partly re
sponsible for John's arrest, were drawn to take sides
with the Pharisees against the disciples of Jesus.
True, John had denounced the Pharisees, but here
was Jesus with his disciples attending a great feast of
publicans and sinners in the house of a prominent pub
lican named Levi.2 John would probably not3 have
attended a feast like that anywhere, most assuredly
not in such a place and in such company. The Phar
isees had made complaint to the disciples of Jesus4
and the disciples of John probably sympathized with
the criticism. At any rate it did look unseemly to
them, all this levity on the part of Jesus (the Messiah,
John's Messiah) and some of John's old disciples,
while John himself languished in the dungeon at
Machserus. Besides, it may have been on one of the
weekly fast days that Levi's feast took place.5 If so,
that made it seem to them a real scandal. The
1 Luke 11:1. 2 Luke 5 : 29; Mark 2 : 15; Matt. 9 : 10.
8 Matt. 11: 18; Luke 7 : 33.
4 Matt. 9 : 11; Mark 2 : 16; Luke 5 : 30.
6 Edersheim, "Life and Times," vol. I, p. 663.

200 JOHN THE LOYAL
stricter Jews fasted twice a week.1 The disciples of
John naturally kept up his ascetic practices. It is
very likely, therefore, that the feast of Matthew was
on one of the nights after a fast had been begun by
the disciples of John and of the Pharisees.2 Hence the
disciples of John feel emboldened and justified in
coming to Jesus, even in company with the Pharisees,3
to make complaint against him and his disciples for
not fasting. The Pharisees are doubtless glad of a
chance to drive the wedge in between the disciples of
John and those of Jesus so as to make a wider separa
tion. Swete4 thinks that Mark shows that it was
scribes, not disciples of John or of the Pharisees, who
made complaint. But this is forcing the matter un
duly in the face of Matt. 2 : 14, where it is expressly
said that the disciples of John came to Jesus about
the matter. The reply of Jesus seems like an echo
of the last public testimony of the Baptist, when he
had called Jesus the bridegroom and himself the friend
of the bridegroom.5 We have no means of knowing
whether Jesus had heard of this testimony of the Bap
tist other than what occurs here. It is natural to
think from this language of Jesus that he had been
informed of the Baptist's noble words. There is no
reflection in Christ's language on the Baptist, not the
slightest. It is some of the disciples of John (not John
himself) who have aligned themselves with Pharisaism
in opposition to Jesus. John had evidently not made
fasting an essential matter at all. We have no word
' Luke 18 : 12. 2 Swete on Mark, 2 : 18.
8 Mark 2 : 18. Cf. Matt. 9 : 14; Luke 5 : 33.
4 In loco. 8 John 3 : 29.

GLOOM 201
from him on the subject. He was still in the Jewish
dispensation. It was not for John to furnish the new
bottle, the new garment. That was for the Messiah.
It is ceremonial Judaism that Jesus calls outworn,
not John's message about repentance and real right
eousness. So Jesus insisted in the presence of these
disciples of John on the right of his disciples as " the
sons of the bride-chamber" to feast instead of fasting.
The time for fasting will come to them, real fasting and
sorrow, when the bridegroom is no longer with them,
for he will be taken away.1 Was Jesus thinking of
what Herod had already done to John, who had been
spirited away to Machserus? Is he delicately saying
to John's disciples that they have good reason to fast ?
He was also thinking of his own end, already foreseen.
They will do unto Jesus as they have done unto John.
" John heard in the prison the work of the Christ." 2
Luke3 says : "And the disciples of John told him all
these things." We are thus under obligation to Mat
thew and Luke4 for a glimpse of the intercommunica
tion that was allowed to go on between John and his
disciples. There was much to tell. Jesus was using
John's text : "The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom
of God is at hand : repent ye, and believe in the
gospel." 5 At other times he used John's identical
language : " Repent ye, for the kingdom of heaven is
at hand." 6 Events had moved rapidly during the
•Matt. 9 : 15; Mark 2 : 20; Luke 5 : 36.
2 Matt. 11:2. 8 7 : 18.
!To quote (the Logia) the common non-Markan source so often used
in Matthew and Luke. Cf. Allen on Matthew; Harnack, "Sayings of
Jesus"; Hawkins, " Horse Synopticaj."
8 Mark 1 : 14. 8 Matt. 4 : 17.

202 JOHN THE LOYAL
months that John lay in prison.1 Jesus had wrought
many wonderful miracles. He cast out demons, who
went out crying : " Thou art the Son of God," but
"he suffered them not to speak, because they knew
that he was the Christ." 2 He had made a tour of
Galilee and "there followed him great multitudes
from Galilee and Decapolis and Jerusalem and Judea
and from beyond Jordan." 3 It surpassed the excit
ing days of John's great ministry. Nobody ever saw
anything like it. The crowds were so great at times
that Jesus had to escape to the desert places to get
away and pray. He could no more openly enter into
a city.4 The Pharisees were up in arms against Jesus
for claiming to be the Son of man with power to for
give sins, but the people were amazed 5 at his miracles
and glorified God : " We never saw it on this fashion."
A sort of fear fell on many.6 The more the Pharisees
opposed Jesus, the closer he seemed to draw to the
publicans and sinners, and actually feasted with them
in the house of a publican.7 This was more than many
of John's own disciples could stand, and on his behalf
they had joined with the Pharisees against the absence
of fasting on the part of the disciples of Jesus.8 They
did not quite understand the comments of Jesus, but
perhaps John would. The Pharisees had gone to the
point of saying : " By the prince of the demons he
casts out demons." 9 In Jerusalem there had been an
open breach between Jesus and the Pharisees. They
had accused him of equality with the Father, of being
1 iv Tip «e<ru.oiTijpi(i>. 2 Luke 4:41. 3 Matt. 4 : 25.
4 Mark 1 : 45. 8 Mark 2 : 10-12. « Luke 5 : 26.
7 Matt. 9 : 10; Mark 2 : 15. s Mark 2 : 18. » Matt. 9 : 34.

GLOOM 203
a Sabbath-breaker because he healed an impotent man
on the Sabbath, and had actually tried to kill Jesus.1
The address of Jesus on the occasion had left them
speechless with rage because of the lofty claims2 made
by Jesus, but he had made a beautiful reference to
John himself3 in his rebuke of the Pharisees. He
called John a witness to the truth and the lamp that
burns and shines. But Jesus had stuck to his posi
tion on the Sabbath, and on two successive Sabbaths
in Galilee had controversy with the Pharisees about
his freedom from their rules for the observance of the
day. Matters came to such a pitch that the Phari
sees actually conspired with the Herodians4 to put
Jesus to death. If things went on this way no one
could tell what the outcome would be. But so far
Jesus was triumphant. He was master of the multi
tude. He had done remarkable and noteworthy
things. He had chosen twelve men, half of them
from among John's old disciples, to be a select band
to be with him all the time, on his preaching tours and
always. On that occasion Jesus had delivered the
most remarkable sermon that people had ever heard.5
He had outlined a policy about righteousness in the
kingdom that was a stinging rebuke to the mere cere
monial righteousness6 of the Scribes and Pharisees.
It reminded John's disciples of his own denunciation7
of the Pharisees and Sadducees down by the Jordan.
On the whole, the teaching of Jesus was an expansion
of that of John. From time to time various disciples
1 John 5 : 10-18. 2 John 5 : 19-29. 8 John 5 : 33-35.
4 Mark 3:6. 8 Matt. 7 : 28 f . » Matt. 5 : 20.
» Matt. 3 : 7.

204 JOHN THE LOYAL
of John came and told him what they knew and what
he was anxious to hear. By and by the most startling
news of all came to the dungeon in Machserus. Jesus
had raised a girl who had apparently been dead.1
But a widow was going with her only son to bury him
near Nain, and Jesus stopped the procession and made
the corpse sit up and speak and gave him to his
mother.2 This was the climax. "A great prophet is
arisen among us : and, God hath visited his people."
This news came to John in addition to all the rest that
he had heard. We are not told the spirit in which the
disciples of John reported these things to John.3
John heard them as "the works of the Christ," and
that is significant. They were apparently reported to
him as the doings of the Messiah, for "the Christ"
was not yet a proper name.
The news set John to musing, for he was by this
time in " a prison mood." 4 He had listened with
eager interest to every bit of news about Jesus as the
Messiah. It was the one topic that most vitally con
cerned him. It is probably in the spring-time when
John hears about the raising of the son of the widow
of Nain. The plucking of the grains of wheat5 in
their hands as the disciples and Jesus walked through
the wheat field shows that Luke is usually chronologi
cal. If so, the miracle and the report of it to John6
followed the incident in the wheat fields. We have
notice in John's Gospel 7 of another spring apparently
a year sooner than this, when Jesus was in Jerusalem.
1 Matt. 9 : 22-26; Mark 5 : 35-43. 2 Luke 7 : 11-17.
3 Bruce, "Matthew," in loco. * Ibid.
8 Luke 6:1. 8 Luke 7 : 1 1-18. 7 John 2:13.

GLOOM 205
Then John the Baptist was still at liberty, and preach
ing, though he was arrested not long afterward. We
do not know at what point of the late spring or early
summer1 the disciples of John brought him this mes
sage which so stirred him. At any rate we may think
of John as having been in prison about a year. What
a change this year has wrought in the fortunes and
feelings of John! Broadus2 has ably pictured John's
situation : " He had indeed been accustomed to com
parative solitude for years 'in the deserts' (Luke
1 : 80) ; but at that time life was before him with its
high hopes, and he doubtless felt himself to be pre
paring for a great mission, the nature of which was
gradually growing clearer to his mind. Then came
some eighteen months of public labors, during which
he was attended by vast crowds, and his ardent nat
ure must have revelled in the high excitement of his
work. And now he is shut up, he, a 'son of the
wilderness,' in one of the deep, dark, and frightfully
hot dungeons of Machserus, deprived of fresh air and
bodily exercise, of cheerful mental employment and
opportunity to do good, and dependent for any future
opportunities on the caprice of a weak king and a
cruel woman. As Elijah sometimes got sadly out of
heart, so John, who in many respects closely resem
bled him, would be likely to grow despondent in this
season of enforced idleness and uncertain danger.
Compare the occasional depression of Moses also."
The very miracle at Nain would remind John "of
Elijah and the widow of Sarepta; of Elisha and the
' Probably A. D. 28. * " Commentary on Matthew," p. 235.

206 JOHN THE LOYAL
lady of the not-far-distant Shunem. They, too, the
greatest of the prophets, had restored to lonely women
their dead only sons." x John has brooded long over
his own fate and over the work of Jesus. What is
his frame of mind? It would have been a miracle
indeed if no doubts had come to him during the weary,
dreary months of his imprisonment. The clouds had
come and gone with John, and then they came again.
It is a bitter thing for any man to feel that his work in
life is over.2 " We are in spirit by the mount of God,
and about to witness the breaking of a terrible storm.
It is one that uproots the great trees and rends the
rocks; and we shall watch it solemnly, earnestly, as
with bared head — or, like Elijah, with face wrapt in
mantle." 3 Most of the time John was alone with his
thoughts. On the whole this may have been best.
The disciples of John did not fully understand him
and were in danger of fossilization.4 John himself
had to face doubts about them, about himself, about
Jesus that rose in that dungeon. " Like serpents that
crept out of its walls, they would uncoil and raise
their heads with horrible hissing." 5 Had some hor
rible mistake been made after all? Was it a night
mare? Was his life on the Jordan a dream? Was
anything real or worth while ? If Jesus was the Mes
siah, why did he leave him to languish in prison?
If he could raise the dead, he could set him free.
There was but one way to settle the matter. It was
1 Farrar, " Life of Christ," vol. I, p. 286.
2 Farrar, "Life of Christ," vol. I, p. 289.
8 Edersheim, "Life and Times," vol. I, p. 666.
4 Ibid. 8 Ibid., p. 667.

GLOOM 207
to appeal to Jesus himself. John called two of his
disciples and sent them to Jesus.
2. The Cry from the Dungeon. — John "sent by his
disciples and said unto" Jesus : "Art thou he that
cometh, or look we for another ? " 1 The message of
John was borne directly to Jesus. John thus spoke
again to Jesus. Once the Pharisees had sent a com
mittee of Sadducees from Jerusalem to John in
Bethany to learn if he claimed to be the Coming One.
They had put the sharp question to John : " Thou,
who art thou ? " 2 So now in John's turn he sends a
committee to Jesus with the same sharp emphasis on
" thou." The question was probably in Aramaic, but
even so the Greek translation may be assumed to be
accurate in tone and emphasis. The two messengers
are abrupt, almost curt, in their approach to Jesus :
" John the Baptist hath sent us unto thee, saying, Art
thou he that cometh, or look we for another ? " 3 The
tone seems apologetic as much as to say, " We should
not have come except that John, our master, has sent
us. We do not wish to interrupt you or to interfere,
but this is the message. We await your reply." We
are probably justified in feeling that these two dis
ciples of John were not particularly friendly to Jesus.
1 Matt. 11:3; Luke 7 : 19. 2i> el 6 ipxbfievos 17 erepov irpoaSoidbp.ev; The
verb may be either the futuristic present indicative or the deliberative
present subjunctive. More likely the latter. In Luke some MSS. (A. D.)
read dkkov, but irepov is the correct text. The idea is probably a different
kind of a Messiah, not merely another (iAAov) of the same kind as Jesus.
Note the emphasis on 2«. Matthew and Luke preserve the logion in the
same form.
2 Sv tis el; John 1 : 19.
3 WH read aAAov here following B, but erepov is doubtless correct as
it is supported by N DL 3 33. Too much is not to be made of the point,
since eTepoi> may mean only a "second," not "different."

208 JOHN THE LOYAL
They doubtless felt much that they would have en-
joyed saying by way of reproach to Jesus for the ap
parent indifference which he had manifested toward
John and his fate. Jesus, they mean to say, had sent
no word of cheer to John. It is John who conde
scends to inquire of Jesus, the man whom John had
baptized and introduced as the Coming One. Now
Jesus is having all the glory and John all the woe.
It is enough to make John lose faith in Jesus. As for
themselves they had already done so. The disciples
of John were right when they protested to John for
his excess of kindness to Jesus, who had swept into the
enjoyment of the fruit of John's toil, and was edging
John off to one side and almost squeezing him out of
the kingdom which John was the first to announce.
The last words that John had spoken about Jesus were
of the most laudatory nature, the very acme of eulogy
for Jesus and of self-abnegation for John. It was all
right for John to be humble and to feel that way, but
they had their opinion of Jesus for taking it all to him
self at the expense of John. If he could work so many
miracles, why did he not do one for John ? John had
done everything for Jesus. What had he done for
John? And now John had been driven in despera
tion to send them to Jesus for one word of comfort,
for one ray of light in the darkness of his dungeon.
They had come out of their love for John, not because
they loved Jesus or expected any good to come out of
the inquiry. As for themselves, they would have died
in the dungeon in independence and self-respect rather
than send this embassy. In their opinion John was

GLOOM 209
just as good as Jesus, if not better. It was John who
had had the courage to denounce the sins of Herod
and Herodias. It was John who had inaugurated the
new day in Israel. The disciples of Jesus had simply
copied John's baptism and were not so pious as the
disciples of John since they led a life of feasting and
did not fast and did not know how to pray. But they
had come because John wished it. And here they
were. What did Jesus have to say in defence of himself
under all the circumstances ? They would like to know.
But surely John himself did not mean all this,
though probably the two disciples did. Indeed, the
disciples may have spoken with John and given their
opinion to him before starting. The embassy is
clearly sent on John's own impulse, " calling unto him
two of his disciples." J But this was done after " the
disciples of John told him all of these things." 2 Some
of John's disciples had opened their hearts to him
in the dungeon about " the works of the Christ." 3
What they said is conjecture, but we know the temper
of the disciples of John who had come to him in the
day of John's power with words about the rising star
of Jesus.4 It is hardly likely that all of John's dis
ciples were kindly disposed to Jesus now that John's
star had set. In fact, we know that some of them had
actually lined up with the Pharisees against Jesus.5 It
is not straining the situation at all to suppose that
some, if not all, of the disciples of John who brought
news of the ever-widening power and fame of Jesus
'Luke 7: 19. 2 Luke 2: 18. ' Matt. 11:2.
4 John 3 : 26. 8 Mark 2 : 18.

210 JOHN THE LOYAL
betrayed a tone of disappointment, a tinge of resent
ment against Jesus because he had displaced John in
favor and prestige. Not that John did not still have
friends. He did have them, but a real breach had
come, as they had foreseen while John was free, and
now those who were most loyal to John held aloof
from Jesus and let him go his way. It is natural for
one's friends to color a situation to please the friend
in sore distress. If a pastor has a division in his
church, his party bear him reports favorable to him
and derogatory to the other side. It was inevitable
that talk of this nature came to John's ears in the
dungeon. When it came before, John had nobly
brushed it all aside.1 Could he do it now after all that
had happened in the past year? Perhaps these dis
ciples of John had suggested to him that the only
hope of his rescue lay in Jesus and they did not be
lieve that he cared enough for John to do anything in
his behalf.2 The very narrowness and unprogressive-
ness of John's disciples may have been one of the ele
ments in John's decision to appeal to Jesus.3 John
could not now handle the situation as he had done
before. It was pitiful to think that John's disciples
should drift away from Jesus, even become hostile to
him. Chrysostom4 long ago suggested that John
made this inquiry for the benefit of his disciples.
The trouble with the form in which this explanation
of the message of John has been held is that it has
i John 3 : 27 ff.
2 Edersheim, "Life and Times," vol. I, p. 661. 3 Ibid., p. 667.
4 See " Oxford Library of the Fathers," X, p. 267. Practically all the
fathers held this view except Tertullian. Cf. Plummer on Luke and
Bruce on Luke. So Luther, Calvin, Beza, Grotius, Bengel, etc.

GLOOM 211
been offered as a substitute for the idea that John
himself was in doubt. It was thought to be discred
itable to John to admit that he was in real doubt.
Hence he asked for the benefit of his disciples. But
the two views are by no means exclusive. It was en
tirely possible for John to wish Jesus to help his dis
ciples for the very reason that John himself was unable
to do so. If Jesus would help John, then John could
give his disciples the guidance which they needed,
could heal the breach that had been made. We may
admit, therefore, that desire to be of service to his dis
ciples who had revealed to John their own anguish of
heart was one of the motives that prompted John's
inquiry. We do not see that it was the only one nor
necessarily the main purpose of John. But any such
notion as that of Theophylact that John merely " af
fects to inquire" or of Euthymius Zigabenus that John
is "in pretence inquiring" may be dismissed as wholly
unworthy of John or of the dignity and seriousness of
the situation.1 John may have had (probably did have)
an interest in the attitude of his disciples, but it was
a real interest, not a make-believe affair like that.
The view of Strauss may be unconditionally re
jected. "Strauss cuts the knot by denying the his
toricity of the earlier narratives, especially the Fourth
Gospel's, which represent John as recognizing and
announcing the Messiahship of Jesus. He does not
now begin to doubt whether after all Jesus is really
the Messiah, but rather begins to wonder if he may
not be the Messiah. 'We have here not a decaying,
i Broadus, "Commentary on Matthew," p. 236.

212 JOHN THE LOYAL
but a growing certainty.'"1 This "budding faith
hypothesis is based on too sceptical a view as to the
historic value of even the synoptical accounts of John's
early relations with Jesus." 2 Such a wilful setting
aside of the sources of information makes historical
study impossible and nugatory. This theory sets the
pyramid on its apex. It may be safely thrown to the
rubbish heap.
We may assume then that John himself was person
ally involved in the inquiry because he also needed
help. Was John in doubt or was he merely impatient ?
Let us take the question of doubt first. " Many have
thought it wholly inconsistent with John's position
and previous testimony to suppose that he now felt
personally the slightest doubt." 3 But that is the
natural import of John's message, and it is best to
take it so unless the difficulties are insuperable. " We
need not suppose that he at any time wholly lost his
persuasion that Jesus was the Messiah, but only that
he became harassed by difficulties that he could not
solve." 4 It was not psychologically impossible for
John to have lapsed at times into doubt. He was in
a real Doubting Castle if ever there was one. It is
true what Herrick says :
"Stone walls do not a prison make,
Nor iron bars a cage;
Minds innocent and quiet take
That for a hermitage."
1 Smith, "Days of His Flesh," p. 224.
2 Bruce, " Matthew," in loco. Strauss is followed by Keim, Weizsacker,
Holtzmann in his "Hand-Commentar" ("beginnende Disposition zum
Glauben an Jesu Messianitat." For a complete answer to Strauss, see
Hase, "Geschichte Jesu," sec. 39, ed. 1891.
8 Broadus, "Matthew," p. 236. ' Ibid., p. 237.

GLOOM 213
But it is very difficult for one to be uninfluenced by
his environment, to hold one's self to the highest all the
time. We can point to the experience of Jesus him
self in the Garden of Gethsemane 1 when under the
stress of sore temptation Jesus with strong crying and
tears2 begged that he might escape the hour, the
dreadful hour before him, when he should hang upon
the Cross for the sin of the world. If it seems natural
that Jesus had this instinctive shrinking from the
terrible task before him, John may be pardoned if
his mind became beclouded on the subject whether
after all Jesus was proving to be the Lamb of God that
taketh away the sin of the world as he had declared 3
him to be. Indeed, as it was now, things seemed to
be turned round. John was the sufferer, while Jesus
was "the idol of the populace, the hero of the hour." 4
This was John's highest conception of the Messiah,
the sacrificial work. But he had also depicted him as
a reformer. The axe was lying at the root of the trees
ready for the Messiah to wield it.5 The Messiah will
take the fan in his hand "and he will thoroughly
cleanse his threshing-floor; and he will gather his
wheat into the garner, but the chaff he will burn up
with unquenchable fire." 8 The mighty baptism of the
Holy Spirit which John had foreseen and predicted7
had not yet come in the full sense of John's idea. We
need not say that John lapsed while in prison to the
political conception of the Messiah held by the Jews
in general, " that Jesus for a time at least raised John's
» Mark 14 : 35 f. 2 Heb. 5:7. • John 1 : 29.
4 Smith, "Days of His Flesh," p. 225.
8 Matt. 3 : 10. 8 Matt. 3 : 12. ' Matt. 3 : 11.

214 JOHN THE LOYAL
mind to the height of his own insight; that when the
influence of Jesus was withdrawn, John relapsed to
his own familiar modes of thought." * He did have
the heightened insight, but it is rather too easy a way
out of the difficulty to suppose that this was due
merely to the presence of Jesus. He had insight be
fore he saw Jesus. It was raised by Jesus, but it re
mained high after he no longer saw Jesus. The doubt
of John here does come as a surprise, but we are to
remember that we have had no word from John for a
year. The natural depression due to his surround
ings had brought him to a pessimistic frame of mind.
As a matter of fact, he could not see that Jesus was
as yet either a reformer or a suffefer.2 He could not
see that the Cross was coming to Jesus, and that from
the Cross Jesus would draw all men to him and so
uplift and reform the race. The prophetic passion
may have cooled in John at this time, but Elijah sat
under the juniper-tree and wished to die. So fiercely
had Jezebel beset him. Jeremiah, another great
prophet, had poured out his soul in "Jeremiah" and
"Lamentations." " Savonarola, and Jerome of Prague,
and Luther were men whose courage, like that of the
Baptist, had enabled them to stand unquailing before
angry councils and threatening kings: who, in forming
an estimate of their goodness and greatness, will add
one shade of condemnation because of the wavering
of the first and of the second in the prison-cells of
Florence and Constance, or the phantasies of incipient
1 Principal A. E. Garvie, The Expositor, VI, p. 375.
2 Smith, " Days of His Flesh," p. 225.

GLOOM 215
madness which agitated, in the castle of Wartburg,
the ardent spirit of the third?"1 Just to be let
alone for so long in this damp, dark, dismal dungeon
was enough to bring one to despair. The fellowship
that John had with his disciples now and then was a
relief in one sense, this occasional glimpse of the great
world outside; but from another point of view, it was
like reopening an old wound. "To a child of free
dom and of passion, to a rugged, passionate, untamed
spirit like that of John, a prison was worse than
death." 2
It is possible also that the long confinement had had
an effect on John's temper. "What ailed John was
not so much a mistaken ideal as impatience." 3 The
moral isolation of Jesus is brought out here by the
apparent irritability of John.4 Perhaps John felt that
he could stir Jesus to more formal announcement of
himself as Messiah, to a line of activity that would
be more reassuring to John's disciples and in truth
to John himself.5 The Jews had an idea, many of
them, that there would be a succession of forerunners.
Without abandoning the conviction that he was him
self a forerunner, John may have wished to raise with
Jesus the question whether he was himself just another
forerunner or in reality the Coming One.6 Some
thought Elijah himself would come to life, others
Jeremiah; some thought "the prophet" spoken of by
1 Farrar, "Life of Christ," vol. I, p. 292.
2 Ibid., p. 290. 3 Smith, "Days of His Flesh," p. 225.
4 Bruce, "Matthew," in loco.
s Broadus, " Matthew," p. 237 ; Kohler, " Johannes der Taufer," S. 166 f .
8 "The Coming One" is the Messiah. Cf. Ps. 118:26; Dan. 7:13;
Mark 11:9; Luke 13: 35; 19:38; Heb. 10:37. Cf. Plummer on Luke,
in loco.

216 JOHN THE LOYAL
Moses would come. Most of those alternatives1 had
been presented to John himself by the Jerusalem
committee. When so much was at stake and in the
midst of so much perplexity it is not strange that John
wished to have all uncertainty allayed. One on the
bed of sickness in the hour of death loves to hear the
reassuring words which he had himself spoken to
others when in health. It was thus a combination of
influences which led to the Baptist's obscuration of
faith and hope.
"Who listened to his voice? obeyed his cry?
Only the echoes which he made relent
Rang from their flinty caves, 'Repent! Repent!"'
"The Baptist's scepticism was real, but it was
honest, and we may learn from him how to manage
our own doubts." 2 Jesus was doing Messianic works,
but he was not claiming in so many words to be the
Messiah. Hence John may have argued that this
silence indicated an uncertainty and even inconsist
ency in the mind of Jesus.3
To us it may seem a puzzle that at that crisis in the
history of the kingdom of God the Baptist should
have been thrown into prison.4 God has often made
" his best and greatest servants drink to the very dregs
the cup of apparent failure." 5 It was to be true of
Jesus himself as John had dimly foreseen in his phrase
1 John 1 : 19 ff. 2 Stalker, "The Two St. Johns," p. 239.
8 Plummer, "Matthew," p. 160. Edersheim ("Life and Times," vol.
I, p. 668) scores a good point when he says that the mention in the gospels
of the weakness of John after his strong testimony to Jesus is good evi
dence of the fidelity of the picture. It is drawn from life.
4 Reynolds, "John the Baptist," p. 412.
8 Farrar, "Life of Christ," vol. I, p. 291,

GLOOM 217
"the Lamb of God." It was true of Stephen, of
Paul. But, when all is said, it may be seriously
questioned whether a more noble and glorious end
could have befallen John than the one which was his.
The disciples of John had already become suspicious
of Jesus. The prolonged activity of John would have
accentuated that. The enforced retirement of John
left the field clear for Jesus, as it should have been.
John's light went out when it was at its brightest.
He met a martyr's death and won a martyr's crown
through no fault of his. Our hearts are with him in
his struggles in the dungeon, but it is a short-sighted
view of God and human life that can see only evil in
the fate of John. God had not forgotten his servant
when he let him remain in Machserus. Nor was Jesus
unconcerned or heartless when he failed to interfere
in John's behalf. But, with all the clouds of doubt
that had gathered around John, let us never forget
that he brought his doubts to Jesus. What can Jesus
say that will dispel the clouds and send sunshine into
the cell at Machserus?
3. The Cheer for John. — At first Jesus made no
reply to the rather sharp inquiry of the messengers of
John. It was apparently a moment of holy excite
ment1 when great crowds pressed around the Master
to hear his words and to be healed of their diseases.
The disciples of John had not waited for a time of
leisure to present their query. It had come in reality
as an interruption. So Jesus worked on as if nothing
had happened. " In that hour he cured many of dis-
' Stalker, "The Two St. Johns," p. 240.

218 JOHN THE LOYAL
eases and plagues and evil spirits; and on many that
were blind he bestowed 1 sight." 2 Probably the dis
ciples grew impatient and may even have manifested
signs of it. This was surely a fine way to treat a
message of the Baptist after all that John had done
for Jesus, and considering the present plight of the
Baptist. But Jesus meant no discourtesy nor was
he careless about John. Is it any reflection on Jesus
to say that he was meditating while he worked ? The
disciples of John watched Jesus. Finally he spoke :
"Go your way, and tell John what things ye have
seen and heard." 3 There was nothing new in that.
John knew of "the works of the Christ" already.4
Yes, he knew, but he did not understand. " It seems
a stern, almost unfeeling reply. He spoke no word
of sympathy. He sent no message of cheer to that
brave soul languishing in prison and questioning
whether the crowning act of his heroic ministry had
not been a fatal blunder. It seems almost a cruel
reply, but in truth Jesus spoke both kindly and
wisely." 5 Jesus went on : " The blind receive their
sight, the lame walk, the lepers are cleansed and the
deaf hear, the dead are raised up, the poor have good
tidings preached to them." 6 The most of these
things had just passed under their eyes. The dis
ciples had the benefit of experience to take to John.
The case of the raising of the son of the Widow of
1 ixapiaaro. Graciously bestowed as a free gift. Cf. a modern oculist
who saves sight for many.
2 Luke 7 : 21. 8 Luke 7 : 22.
4 Matt. 11:2.
8 Smith, " Days of His Flesh," p. 226.
8 Luke 7 : 22. Cf. Matt. 11 : 4 f.

GLOOM 219
Nain was very recent.1 There was only one new point
in the message. That was the preaching to the poor.
This was a Messianic sign as John would probably
recognize.2 They are all works of mercy, none mere
works of power or display such as the Pharisees ex
pected the Messiah to perform.3 The works of Jesus
that John had heard of in the prison might prove only
that Jesus was a great prophet. Elijah and Elisha
had raised the dead. Jesus had himself claimed the
preaching to the poor to be a Messianic sign.4 It was
a new thing in Jewish life for a rabbi to honor the
poor. The message of Jesus to John therefore is
symbolical, like that of Tarquinius Superbus to his
son Sextus at Gabii.5 They are to tell John what
they have seen Jesus doing. Actions speak louder
than mere words. It would be easy for Jesus to say
the word Messiah, but a mere claim would not make
it true. Jesus does not seem concerned whether the
messengers will understand his symbolism or not.6
But surely John will comprehend.
Jesus does not mention the word Messiah7 nor the
phrase of John " the Coming One." If he had done
so on this occasion, he would have violated his custom
at this period of his ministry. After the first few
months we find Jesus carefully abstaining from apply
ing the term Messiah to himself. The jealousy of
the Pharisees had already been aroused against him
and they would understand the use of "Messiah" by
1 The tenses are all present (iterative present).
2 Bruce, "Matthew," in loco. Cf. Isa. 35 : 5; 61 : 1.
8 Plummer, "Matthew," p. 160. 4 Luke 4 : 18-21.
8 Plummer, "Matthew," p. 160. " Plummer, "Matthew," p. 160.
' Sanday, "The Life of Christ in Recent Research," p. 57.

220 JOHN THE LOYAL
Jesus in the political sense which was untrue in itself
and which would lead to insurrection against Rome
or at least violent popular disturbance.1 These very
disciples of John might have been misled by the use
of the term by Jesus. Jesus could not afford to imperil
the course of his ministry by giving a categorical reply
to the question of John. He therefore sends John an
affirmative answer, but in symbolism; a cryptogram,
but not a very hard one to read. " It was not indeed
the sort of evidence that John was looking for; but it
was his expectation that was at fault, and Jesus had
faith in his sincerity, his candor, his open-mindedness,
his willingness to reconsider his opinions and abandon
them if he found them untenable." 2
4. The Gentle Reproof. — "And blessed is he, who
soever shall find none occasion of stumbling in me." 3
This is a beatitude that Jesus sends John. It is ex
pressed in general terms, but John will certainly un
derstand what Jesus means. Jesus does not place a
premium on doubt, not even on honest doubt such as
that in the case of John. With all the natural causes
that led to John's doubt, it was weakness, not strength.
There was pathos in the use of the word "happy" by
Jesus. John was certainly not happy, and doubt had
made him more unhappy than ever. Many will find
i Broadus, "Harmony of the Gospels," p. 24.
2 Smith, "Days of His Flesh," p. 226.
3 Luke 7 : 23; Matt. 11:6. nal paicapios eoriK os i&v p;5| axavSakiaSjj iv
ip.oi. The use of puutapios is like that in Matt. 5 : 3 ff . The use of
anavSaki£u) (common in the New Testament) may be compared with Isa.
8 : 14. "John was in a dangerous state of mind. If he had given way
to his pessimistic mood he might have stumbled over the stone which he
had been sent to lay in Zion as the chief comer-stone" (Stalker, "The Two
St. Johns," p. 245).

GLOOM 221
Jesus a stumbling-block, but that ought not to be true
of John. He had been enlightened beyond the men
of his time. He ought to understand Jesus. This
message of tender rebuke would confirm the implicit
claim of Jesus to be the Messiah. The import of all
that Jesus has said in his message to John is that he
is what John had proclaimed him to be. He sends
renewed proof of his power. John should not doubt.
There was nothing in Jesus to justify doubt. He
was going on with the work of the kingdom in the
way that he had begun. It would all come out right
in the end. Jesus was doubtless deeply touched by
this sad wail from John, for Jesus could only love the
Herald of the Messiah. He sent him the best possible
message out of a heart that loved him and sympathized
with him. John had somehow misunderstood Jesus,
and Jesus was deeply grieved to find it so. It was
almost a tragedy that there should come the least
misunderstanding between John and Jesus. But
John is right at heart as Jesus knows. Jesus was in
no way responsible for the present predicament of
John. The disciples of John left with this message
of Jesus and bore it to John, perhaps dubious what
comfort John would get out of it. But Jesus was
concerned about John's insight, not about theirs.
Let us hope that John did see all that Jesus wished
him to understand, that his heart was permanently
refreshed by the words of Christ. One can almost
feel sorry that these two disciples of John had not heard
the generous praise that Jesus gave to John when once
they were out of hearing.1 It seems as if Christ made
¦Matt. 11:7; Luke 7: 24.

222 JOHN THE LOYAL
a point of waiting till they were out of ear-shot before
"he began to say unto the multitudes concerning
John." 1 From one stand-point this noble eulogy
would have been meat and drink to John in his lone
liness and grief. Bits of it probably were carried to
John afterward by other disciples of his. Farrar2
even supposes that Jesus spoke privately to John's
messengers other words of affection and encourage
ment "for the grand prisoner whose end was now so
rapidly approaching — words which would be to him
sweeter than the honey which had sustained his hunger
in the wilderness, dearer than water-springs in the
dry ground." But there is no real basis for that sup
position. Perhaps Jesus felt that his praise would
seem more sincere and genuine if not meant as a
direct message to John. It was more delicate, as it
was, and shows how much Jesus really loved John,
how he had done all to cheer him that lay in his power.
The purpose of Jesus may have been partly to vindi
cate John in the minds of some in the multitude who
thought " John irresolute or cowardly." 3 Plummer4
suggests also that if the disciples of John had heard
this glowing eulogy it would have counteracted the
effect of the rebuke which Jesus had given. "This
panegyric is almost the funeral oration of the Baptist;
for soon after this he was put to death." 5
1 Luke 7 : 24. 2 " Life of Christ," vol. I, p. 293.
3 Smith, " Days of His Flesh," p. 226.
4 "Luke," p. 204. 8 Plummer, ibid.

CHAPTER X
APPRECIATION
"Among them that are born of women there hath not
arisen a greater than John the Baptist" (Matt. 11 : 11).
1. The Courage of John. — John had often borne
testimony to Jesus, and Jesus now bears glad witness
to his great worth and work.1 "In society men are
commonly praised to their face, or the faces of their
friends, and blamed behind their backs. Jesus does
the opposite in the case of John." 2 " Gossip only
waits till the door is shut behind a visitor before can
vassing every defect in his appearance and ripping up
the seams of his character." 3 Jesus probably knew
that the by-standers "were charging the Baptist with
vacillation and cowardice. His faith, once so assured,
was shaken; adversity had broken his spirit." 4 In
the minds of the people, now that the messengers of
John are gone, Jesus will not seem to be using words
of fulsome flattery. It is clear that Jesus was not
willing for the inquiry of John and his reply to have
the effect on the crowd of depreciating John. Jesus
was not willing for the people to draw injurious in
ferences5 from what had just occurred, so that he
1 Broadus, "Matthew," p. 238. 2 Plummer, "Matthew," p. 161.
'Stalker, "The Two St. Johns," p. 247.
4 Smith, "Days of His Flesh," p. 226.
6 Bruce, "Matthew," p. 170. 223

224 JOHN THE LOYAL
began at once, as the messengers departed, his defence
of John. He spoke with poetic intensity1 in discharge
of a debt2 of love to John. It is Jesus who thus in
terprets for men the real significance of John. It was
John who first apprehended Jesus and interpreted
him to some of his disciples. Now in turn Jesus "in
language of rhythmic and perfect loveliness" 3 shows
the perfect solidarity between himself and John, finds
John's niche in the temple of history and places him
securely in it. No one can dislodge John from the
high pinnacle on which Jesus put him. No one had
so perfect an understanding of the human heart as
Jesus. His judgments of men are final.4 Jesus spoke
such glorious praise of no other man. It is all true,
but was probably occasioned by the very pathos of
John's situation. It was a fine opportunity to do
John justice, and Jesus quickly seized it. " What
went ye out into the wilderness to behold? a reed
shaken with the wind ? But what went ye out to see ?
A man clothed in soft raiment? Behold, they which
are gorgeously apparalled, and live delicately, are in
kings'." 5 These questions of Jesus brought the
crowd back to a sane stand-point concerning John.
The catechetical method is lively and impressive6
always, but it was the quickest way to change the
current of thought in the crowd. The present atti
tude of many of them was nothing less than a carica
ture of the real John7 as Jesus knew him to be. At
1 Stalker, "The Two St. Johns," p. 248. 2 Godet, "Luke," in loco.
3 Farrar, "Life of Christ," vol. I, p. 293. 4 John 2 : 25.
B Luke 7 : 24 f .
8 Bruce, "Matthew," in loco.
' Stalker, "The Two St. Johns," p. 248.

APPRECIATION 225
bottom John was highly esteemed still by the masses
and Jesus was not willing to see that good reputation
destroyed. The bulk of those before Jesus had prob
ably gone to the wilderness to behold 4 John. He was
the greatest spectacle of his time and many had gone
from mere curiosity. It is always so in times of re
ligious excitement. Some go to mock and remain to
pray. The "reed 2 shaken in the wind" is still to be
seen by the Jordan. " Yet the stream flows in the old
bed. Still gendy blows the wind among the sighing
reeds." 3 The words can be taken literally, to mean
that people flocked to the Jordan to see the reeds
shaken in the wind. But that is rather jejune in
spite of great names which support it.4 The people
went to see John the Baptist. It is a rhetorical ques
tion and the idea is that, if John had been fickle and
vacillating like a reed in the wind, the people would
not have continued to go to see and hear him. Even
the rulers paid John the tribute of a visit and rejoiced
in this bright and shining light " for a season." 5 The
picture of one reed shaking in the breeze is the image
of a weak inconstant man. That is precisely what
John was not, and those who had just heard his cry
for light must not think so. Jesus calls them from
John's moment of temporary doubt due to his pro
longed imprisonment to the real character of the man
as they themselves had known him in the days of his
1 dedaaovai in Matt. 11:7 (but Luke has iSeiv) as a spectacle. Cf.
theatre. 2 icdkap.ov vtt'o dvep.ov aakevop.evov.
3 Furrer, " Wanderungen," S. 185. Translated by Bruce on Matthew,
in loco.
4 De Wette, Fritzsche, Grotius, etc. 5 John 5 : 35.

226 JOHN THE LOYAL
power in the wilderness. It is not fair to a man to
judge his whole career by those moments of depres
sion which come to all. The question answers itself
and Jesus asks another :x " But what went ye out to
see? A man clothed in soft raiment?" 2 The ques
tion is again rhetorical and keenly ironical. The
image of John in his garment of rough hair-cloth with
his leathern girdle is brought vividly to their minds
by the "soft raiment" of silk or fine linen such as
one finds in the gorgeous apparel of those in kings'
courts who live in delicacy and luxury in contrast
to John's locusts and wild honey. If John were a
coward, he would have been a courtier and would
have fawned upon Herod and Herodias with flattery.
This bold, rudely clad, uncompromising witness to the
truth was not won from the straight path by the smile
of a king nor intimidated by the hate of a queen. He
stood "like an iron pillar and a brazen wall" 3 against
error and wickedness. John was no worldling like
Herod Antipas, no hypocrite like the Pharisees. He
was courage incarnate, no demagogue, no courtier.
2. The Last of the Prophets. — Jesus went on. He
had brushed out of the way the possible miscon
ceptions of John by the two previous pointed ques
tions. Now he is ready to give the positive side of
John's character. " But what went ye out to see ? a
prophet?"4 "Yea" Jesus adds, that they may not
think this a mere rhetorical question like the rest.
1 The dkkd waves aside the former question.
2 ti- paAaxoi; ip.aTi'oi? ijp.ipLeap.evov.
3 Stalker, "The Two St. Johns," p. 249.
4 Luke 7: 26. Cf. Matt. 11 : 9.

APPRECIATION 227
"Right at last; a prophet, indeed, with all that one
expects in a prophet — vigorous moral conviction, in
tegrity, strength of will, fearless zeal for truth and
righteousness; utterly free from the feebleness and
time-serving of those who bend like reeds to every
breath of wind, or bow obsequiously before greatness." i
Jesus had struck the popular chord about John, for
the people held him to be a prophet2 if ever there was
one. The long weary years when no prophet had ap
peared in Israel gave heightened interest to John.3
He had the prophetic gift in all its reality and power,
and that is the explanation of his tremendous power
with the people. He was a true fore-speaker4 as well
as a for-speaker. Stalker5 notes " that every man of
prophetic endowment has to pass through the stages
of criticism against which John was defended by
Jesus" (a mere demagogue who bent to the popular
breeze; then a man who pandered to. the rich and
powerful and moved in the king's court as a courtier
in soft raiment). It is true also of many a modern
preacher that he has to live down suspicion, misunder
standing, envy. " Only after running the gauntlet of
such criticism does he at last wring from the minds of
his contemporaries the acknowledgment that he is a
prophet." 6 John was the last and the greatest of the
prophets. Like Samuel, the last and greatest of the
judges who inaugurated a new era (the monarchy
succeeding the theocracy), so John was the last pro-
1 Bruce, " Matthew," in loco. 2 Matt. 21 : 26.
3 Broadus, " Matthew," p. 239. 4 irpo-<pijT]js.
8 "The Two St. Johns," pp. 249 f.
8 Stalker, "The Two St. Johns," p. 250.

228 JOHN THE LOYAL
phetic voice under the old dispensation and intro
duced the new age, the Messianic era. "For all the
prophets and the law prophesied until John." * The
point is in " until John." 2 John was not a mere con-
tinuator of the prophetic line who kept repeating the
prophecy that the Messiah will come.3 John went
further. He said : " The kingdom of heaven is at
hand." Yes, and he finally said that the Messiah
had come. John is the last predictor of the kingdom,
the first preacher of it.4 That ended the old order.
John, then, is the great mile-post between the old order
and the new. He marked the close of one epoch, the
beginning of another. He stands as a great mountain
peak in solitary grandeur, the last and highest in the
long range of mountains.
3. Much More than a Prophet. — He is a prophet,
the greatest of the prophets, but he is what no prophet
ever was. The phrase5 was one to catch the ear.
But, at first, one is puzzled to see how John could be
greater than a prophet, even his own prophetic office.
The explanation is found in the quotation from Mal-
achi6 given by Jesus :
"Behold, I send my messenger before thy face,
Who shall prepare thy way before thee." 7
Here in the fullest and frankest manner Jesus recog
nizes John as his Forerunner just as John had claimed.
1 Matt. 11 : 13.
2 Sou "Iutivov. Luke (16:16) has Jesus saying another time: "The
laws and the prophets were until John."
3 Bruce, " Matthew," in loco. ' Broadus, " Matthew," p. 242.
6 irepioaorepov npotbrJTov. 6 3 : 1.
7 Matt. 11 : 10; Luke 7 : 27. Cf. Mark 1 : 2.

APPRECIATION 229
He sets the seal of his approval upon John's minis
try as John had baptized and introduced Jesus. The
real relation between John and Jesus thus comes out
clearly in a way to remove all ambiguity. Jesus is
addressing those supposed to be in sympathy with him
and this public and precise endorsement of the work
of John removes all ground for misunderstanding.
John is just what he always claimed to be. " This is
he," says Jesus, of whom the prophet Malachi wrote.
Once John had said of Jesus : " This is he." l John
is himself the subject of prophecy. That is more
than being a prophet. Jesus is here exalting his own
position in exalting John.2 He is virtually claiming
to be the Messiah of whom John is the Forerunner,
but he avoids using the term as he did in the message
to John. It is in a sense an accident that the high
honor of being the Forerunner falls to John,3 since
some prophet had to fulfil that office. It is thus more
a matter of good fortune than of merit that John
happens to be the "Elijah which is to come." * This
remark of Jesus would catch the popular ear because
John had denied to the Jerusalem committee that he
was Elijah.5 Jesus, in fact, calls special attention to
it, as if to emphasize it : " He that hath ears to hear,
let him hear." 6 Jesus is very fond of this way of
winning attention if interest flags or he wishes to drive
the point home, or if ignorance or prejudice has to be
overcome.7 "We can scarcely conceive how difficult
1 John 1 : 30. 2 Broadus, " Matthew," p. 239.
3 Bruce, " Matthew," in loco. 4 Matt. 11 : 14.
8 John 1:21. "Matt. 11:15.
' Cf. Matt. 13 : 9, 43; 24 : 15. Cf. Broadus, " Matthew," p. 242.

230 JOHN THE LOYAL
it was for the Jews to accept the assertion that the
prophecy of Elijah's coming was fulfilled in John the
Baptist. And we have abundant need to fear lest we
ourselves lack ears to hear, lack the spiritual percep
tion and sympathy, the candor and willingness to fol
low truth, the readiness to let the Bible mean what it
wishes to mean, which are necessary to a thorough
understanding of Scripture." x " If ye are willing to
receive it," says Jesus. It was opposed to the popu
lar ideas on the subject, and to John's express denial
because of that popular misconception. Much as the
people thought of John, they were hardly willing to go
that far. They liked him best when he was attacking
the sins of others. " His stern demand for repentance,
and for conduct worthy of a penitent, was not liked by
many; and his declaration that descent from Abraham
gave no claim to admission into the kingdom was dis
liked by all." 2 But Jesus probably also meant that
they must take the identification of John with Elijah
cum grano salts, not in a baldly literal way as the Jews
had expected and as John had properly denied.
" Christ idealizes, seizes the essential truth. John was
all the Elijah that would ever come, worthy to repre
sent him in spirit, and performing the function as
signed to Elijah redivivus in prophecy." 3 This was
all that was ever promised of John by the angel
Gabriel.4 So, then, John is the Forerunner of the Mes
siah and stands above all the prophets. "In that
i Broadus, " Matthew," p. 242 f.
2 Plummer, "Matthew," p. 163.
8 Bruce, " Matthew," in loco.
4 Luke 1 : 17. Cf. what Jesus said later in Matt. 17 : 11; Mark 9 : 13.

APPRECIATION 231
long procession the King comes last, and the highest
is he who walks in front of the Sovereign." *
4. The Greatest of Men. — Jesus is rising in his ex
pressions of praise. It is a mighty crescendo. To
change the figure, he is piling Pelion on Ossa. " Among
them that are born of women there hath not arisen a
greater than John the Baptist." 2 It is easy to say
off-hand that a man is the greatest man who ever
lived, and not mean it. Jesus did make use of hyper
bole at times as all speakers do. But we are accus
tomed to measure his words, to weigh them, and we
do not find them wanting. We cannot think that
here Jesus passed an exaggerated compliment on
John that he knew would be properly discounted.
His language is very solemn and formal : " Verily I
say unto you." 3 It is his personal conviction and
must be accepted at its face value. Jesus has just
been speaking of John's historic position as the Fore
runner, but he now turns to discuss the character
of John, his own intrinsic worth as a man.4 Some
manuscripts5 in Luke 7 : 28 do have " prophet," but
it is righdy left out of the Revised Version. It was
evidently inserted by some scribe to relieve the mani
fest difficulty of the saying. If John was merely the
greatest prophet, the matter would be much simpler.
Indeed, many, probably most, scholars to-day take
the remark of Jesus to refer solely to the position of

1 Alexander Maclaren.
2 Matt. 11: 11. Cf. Luke 7:28. p\ei(mv 'Imdvov tou ftamurioZ,
8 Matt. 11: 11.
4 Bruce, "Matthew," in loco.
8 But not NBL, most versions.

232 JOHN THE LOYAL
John as the Forerunner.1 He was so great because
he occupied that lofty position. That is true, but I
cannot myself feel that this is all that Jesus meant to
say in such a solemn way. It is not necessary to say
that Jesus has all men who will ever live in mind. His
own case is a peculiar one and stands apart from the
rest. It may even be that the comparison of Jesus
moves in the circle of Jewish life and history.2 That
is probably true, though the expression " among them
that are born of women" seems like a "solemn peri
phrasis for the whole race of mankind." 3 There are
difficulties from any point of view, and this word of
Jesus was not probably accepted by the people who
usually rank the dead above the living.4 Instantly
the minds of the audience would challenge that state
ment with the names of Abraham, Moses, David,
Elijah, Isaiah, Jeremiah. Surely Jesus could not
mean to place John above these men! They would
not likely think of Homer, Plato, Buddha, or Con
fucius.5 But they would easily call to mind Judas
Maccabeus, Hillel, Shammai among recent men. The
solution lies in one's conception of greatness. Who
is really great? What is greatness ? Men have vary
ing standards. Some care more for power, others
for money, others for brilliance of intellect, others for
achievement in statecraft, in battle, in industrial pur
suits. Herod was called " Great"; so was Alexander;
1 Broadus, Godet, Plummer, etc. Zahn (" Evangelium des Matthaus,"
S. 428) suggests that Jesus does not have in mind the writing prophets
like Isaiah, Jeremiah, since John wrote nothing, but only prophets like
Samuel, Elijah, Elisha.
2 Bruce, "Matthew," in loco. » Plummer, "Matthew," p. 162.
4 Bruce, "Matthew," in loco.
1 Stalker, "The Two St. Johns," p. 251.

APPRECIATION 233
so were Sophocles, Socrates, Thucydides, Praxiteles,
Demosthenes. " We measure greatness by the size of
the brain — by what men call brilliance, talent, genius." 1
We may be quite sure that Jesus has in mind no such
superficial measure of greatness as that. " God's way
of estimating greatness is different : greatness is to be
sought in faithfulness to duty, in the humility with
which the gifts of God are received and utilized; above
all, in nearness to God." 2 This is the point that men
overlook in their estimate of John, but it was just the
matter that Jesus cared most about. The angel
Gabriel had said that John would be "great in the
sight of the Lord." 3 The career of John the Baptist
in a striking way illustrates the Parable of the House
holder and the Laborers in the Vineyard.4 John's
ministry was short and came at the end of the long
day, but he did a full man's work in the eleventh hour.
" So the last shall be first and the first last." John
was both last and first; last in time, first in the quality
of his service. John had taken his pound and made
it come to ten pounds,5 to use another parable of Jesus.
Faithfulness is the true measure of greatness. In
God's eye greatness and goodness are very nearly
equivalent terms. I would not say that Jesus ex
cludes the superior position of John in his estimate of
his greatness, but that he does not confine his measure
of greatness to that. John was a real prophet; he
was the last and greatest of the prophets; 6 he was
much more than a prophet because he was the Fore-
i Stalker, "The Two St. Johns," p. 251.
2 Ibid. 8 Luke 1 : 15. 4 Matt. 20 : 1-16. 6 Luke 19 : 16.
8 Zahn, "Evangelium zu Matt.," S. 423.

234 JOHN THE LOYAL
runner of the Messiah, Elijah that was to come; he
was equal to the greatest of men. Thus the argument
runs. The last point is the necessary climax. The
solemn " verily I say unto you " and the extension of
the comparison to all those "born of women" lifts the
comparison to the summit. It is a supreme position
that John occupied. He stood next to the Son of
God himself. That was honor beyond that received
by Abraham, Moses, David, Isaiah, Socrates, Plato,
Demosthenes, Alexander, Judas Maccabeus, Hillel,
Shammai. It was largely reflected glory and great
ness that came to John, as the moon reflects the beauty
of the sun. But not wholly so, in my opinion. In
the supreme place where John stood right beside the
Sun of Righteousness he was " the lamp that burneth
and shineth." J That is great praise. The brightest
electric light makes a poor figure in the face of the
noon-day sun. I once saw natural-gas lamps ablaze
in broad daylight all over Calgary, Canada, because
it was cheaper to let them burn than to put them out
and relight them each day. But the lights were mis
erable tapers in the Canadian summer sun. John
burned with the bright and steady light of loyalty to
truth and righteousness when he came into the pres
ence of the Son of God himself. He was, like all
mortals born of woman, still a man of weakness and
frailty, sorrow and sin.2 Jesus does not mean to crown
John with the garland of perfection. But, under the
very shadow of the recent exhibition of John's weak
ness and doubt Jesus calls him equal to the greatest
¦ John 5 : 35. 2 Zahn, "Evangelium zu Matt.," S. 424.

APPRECIATION 235
of men, a negative way of saying that he is the greatest.
I would not press the point too far to the disparage
ment of other men, but by the highest standard of true
greatness known to us, that of loyalty to duty in a
supreme place, John meets the test squarely and
fairly. We use the term " inherent greatness," but we
probably mean only genius. The moral quality of
supreme loyalty overtops mere genius. The point of
view of Jesus here is " capacity to render effective ser
vice to the kingdom of God." x There John stands
supreme. 5. The Least in the Kingdom. — John was the last
link 2 with the past. He stood upon the shoulders of
the past, the bravest and truest of them all, "Yet he
that is but litde in the kingdom of heaven is greater
than he." 3 It is a most astonishing turn to the sen
tence and to the thought. The first has suddenly
become last. Jesus is fond of paradox and startling
turns of expression. It was part of his power as a
speaker and teacher of audiences of varied intelligence.
It is part of the power of his words to-day to grip and
hold the attention and interest of men. But Jesus
does not deal in paradoxes just to be striking. If
there is not a real, even great, thought in the paradox,
it becomes wearisome. The translation "he that is
but little" 4 is unfortunate and conceals the real idea.
1 Bruce, " Matthew," in loco.
2 Edersheim, "Life and Times," vol. I, p. 670.
8 Matt. 11:11. Cf. Luke 7 : 28.
4 o puepoTcpoc. The comparative with the article should be taken either
as a true comparative or as the equivalent of the superlative. In the
modern Greek the usual way of expressing the superlative is by the
article and the comparative. The idiom is common in the New Testa
ment both with and without the article. Cf. ku'juv in Matt. 18 : 1;

236 JOHN THE LOYAL
The Authorized Version has it more in accord with
the Greek idiom, "he that is least in the kingdom."
The Revised rendering is really quite out of place1
and ignores the current Greek idiom. We may pass
by as quite beside the mark the notion of Chrysostom,
though followed by so many of the fathers and later
writers, 2 that "the least in the kingdom" is Jesus
himself. This interpretation is that Jesus, though
less in age and fame than John, is in reality greater.
This is a truth, but it is more than doubtful if Jesus
would choose this occasion to speak thus of himself.
The inquiry from John had without doubt raised the
problem of the relation between John and Jesus, and
Jesus had spoken on that point in calling John the
prophetic Forerunner or Elijah. But the interpreta
tion in question would place Jesus in the position of
appealing to the multitude to think more of himself
than of John, a difficult thing to think of at this junc
ture. That was not involved.3 Jesus means, therefore,
to say that the least in the kingdom of heaven is
greater than John, any one of the crowd before Jesus
who was really in the kingdom. What did he mean ?
Was it due to defects in John's spirit and temper?
"He utterly misconceived the Messianic kingdom —
John conceived the Messiah as a stern Reformer, and
he was eager for the inauguration of the new and
I Cor. 13:13; o p.elfav 18 : 4; 23:11. See Robertson, " Short Grammar
of the Greek New Testament," p. 66. The superlative form p.iKp6raTos
is absent from the New Testament.
1 Broadus, "Matthew," p. 240.
2 Hilary, Ambrose, Theophylact, Enthymius Zigabenus, Erasmus,
Luther. 3 Bruce ("Matthew") calls this notion of Chrysostom an exegetical
curiosity."

APPRECIATION 237
better era. He had broken with the old order; he
had forsaken Temple and Synagogue, and assailed the
rulers with fierce denunciation. He had inflamed the
zealot-temper and set the land afire. Men were think
ing to establish the Kingdom of Heaven by violent and
revolutionary methods. This spirit and these methods
Jesus viewed with profound disapprobation, recogniz
ing as He did the value of the ancient faith, as a prepa
ration for His perfect revelation, and the spirituality
of the Kingdom of Heaven. He had the Baptist in
His eye when He said at the outset of His ministry :
' Whosoever looseth one of these least commandments
and teacheth men so, least shall he be called in the
Kingdom of Heaven.' And now He reiterates the
declaration with still greater emphasis : ' One that is
but litde in the Kingdom of Heaven is greater than
he.' " 1 It seems to me that Dr. Smith has here put
John in the strait-jacket of the Pharisees whose per
functory traditionalism John had denounced. The
disciples of John, some of them, had come to affiliate
with the Pharisees in opposition to Jesus, but there is
no proof that they really represented John in this at
titude. There were evidences in John's own preach
ing (the baptism of the Holy Spirit in the Synoptic
Gospels,2 the Lamb of God in John's Gospel3) that
the Baptist had grasped the spiritual conception of
the kingdom and of the Messiah. Besides, the es
chatological apocalyptic language of John can be
paralleled with similar words from Jesus himself.
• Smith, "Days of His Flesh," pp. 227 f.
2 Matt. 3:11; Mark 1 : 7; Luke 3 : 16. > John 1 : 29, 35.

238 JOHN THE LOYAL
John certainly did not have the fulness of knowledge
that was possible to those under the immediate tute
lage of Jesus, but it is going further than the words of
Jesus justify to put John in the category of the Phari
sees. It is certainly true that, in calling the least in
the kingdom of heaven greater than John, Jesus has
in mind position and privilege, not character or per
formance.1 In the description of John as the greatest
born of women it was urged that Christ had reference
to John's fidelity as well as to his high station. There
would thus be a change in the point of view somewhat
like that in the double use of " life " in the saying :
" Whosoever would save his life shall lose it." 2 John
is only the friend of the Bridegroom, as he had said,
while the followers of Jesus are his spouse.3 He is
the greatest servant of the King, while they are the
sons of the bride-chamber.4 John did have moral
sternness,5 but it may be seriously questioned if Bruce5
is right in holding that quality responsible for John's
doubt of Jesus and inferiority in rank to the disciples
of Jesus. He says : " It made him doubt Jesus, kept
him aloof from the kingdom, and placed him below
anyone who in the least degree understood Christ's
gracious spirit, e. g., one of the Twelve called in x. 42
' these little ones.' " I think that John's graciousness
of spirit is quite on a par with that of the disciples who
"disputed one with another in the way, who was the
greatest," 6 who wanted to call down fire to burn up
a Samaritan village,7 who forbade men to cast out
1 Stalker, "The Two St. Johns," p. 251. 2 Matt. 16 : 25.
3 Plummer, " Matthew," p. 162. 4 Matt. 9 : 15.
8 " Matthew," in loco. 8 Mark 9 : 34. ' Luke 9 : 54.

APPRECIATION 239
demons in the name of Jesus unless they followed the
disciples,1 who wanted the chief places in the king
dom,2 who could have a contention for personal pro
motion at the last passover meal of Jesus,3 to go no
further. These matters are not mentioned for the
purpose of disparaging the disciples in the least, but
to show that Bruce is in error in depreciating the spirit
of John in comparison with that of the twelve apostles.
The truth about John is that Jesus here looks upon
him as the last in the old dispensation. The kingdom
of heaven is here used in the sense of the new dispen
sation or New Testament era.4 "The law and the
prophets were until John." 5 John marked the close
of the old era, the beginning of the new. It must be
repeated that the sense of "kingdom of heaven" is
not that of inward experience of grace or the reign of
God in the heart, the usual idea in the New Testament.
In this sentence Jesus uses the phrase for the new
spiritual order. In this technical sense of the term
John was not in the kingdom of heaven. He be
longed to the old order. Meyer6 quotes a legal
maxim : " The least of that which is greatest is greater
than the greatest of that which is least." In privilege
and opportunity the lowest in rank in the new order
are ahead of John who was the highest of the old
order. It is not true that the lowest in character in
the new order is superior in character or performance
to John. John's standing in that respect has already
• Mark 9 : 38 f . * Luke 18 : 37. 8 Luke 22 : 24.
4 Stalker, "The Two St. Johns," p. 252. 3 Luke 16 : 16.
' "Matthew," in loco, from Maldonatus: Minimum maximi est majus
maxime minimi. Cf. Farrar, "Life of Christ," vol. I, p. 294.

240 JOHN THE LOYAL
been made secure by the word of Jesus. He now
turns to another matter, that of opportunity. Jesus
was pouring forth a wealth of spiritual knowledge
that the world had not possessed before. His teach
ing is still to-day the wonder and joy of the whole
earth. John had come right up to Jesus, but, so far
as we know, did not hear a single discourse from the
Master Teacher and Preacher1 of the ages. He came
so near and missed so much. Jesus has therefore used
his high encomium of John as a hammer to drive home
to his audience in a powerful way their own tremendous
responsibility. John had lived up to his light with
loyalty and fidelity. They need not be worried about
him. What were they going to do with their own
transcendent privilege ? Capernaum, Bethsaida,
Chorazin will put to blush Sodom and Gomorrah,
Tyre and Sidon. Broadus2 compares the position of
John to that of a landing-place in a stairway which
turns at that point. It is the highest part of the stair
way up to that point. It is the lowest of the next
flight of steps. Chrysostom has likened him to the
hour between dawn and sunrise. It is the close of
night, the beginning of day. Stalker3 has illustrated
John's position by the three kingdoms (mineral,
vegetable, animal). The lowest of the vegetable is
higher than the highest of the mineral. The lowest
of the animal is higher than the highest of the vegetable.
This illustration is all the more pertinent in view of
scientific discoveries like radium which obscure the
1 Cf. Bond, The Master Preacher. 2 "Commentary," p. 241.
3 "The Two St. Johns," p. 252.

APPRECIATION 241
distinctions drawn. That is to say, it is hard to put
your finger down and say which is wholly mineral
and not vegetable, which is wholly vegetable and not
animal. The border-line disappears. In a true sense,
therefore, John is both in and out of the kingdom.
Jesus treats him here as out of the kingdom to illus
trate this point. The beginning of John's ministry
was dawn, while Pentecost was the full blaze of the
Messianic era.1 Stalker2 aptly reminds us that Paul
makes precisely the comparison that Jesus here draws
between the two dispensations. "For verily that
which hath been made glorious hath not been made
glorious in this respect, by reason of the glory that sur-
passeth. For if that which passe th away was with
glory, much more that which remaineth is in glory." 3
It is the shame of Christians that they do not rise
to the height of their opportunity and responsibility.
" It is from the sense of being ideally lifted up into a
region of holiness and blessedness through our con
nection with Christ that we are supplied with the mo
tive and the power for a real conflict with evil." 4
So far John. But has his work been a success?
That is one test of a man's work, though not the only
one. Paul appealed to the success of his work as an
aposde against the Judaizers.5 Could there be suc
cess to a man's work when he lay in prison? "And
from the days of John the Baptist until now the king
dom of heaven suffereth violence, and men of violence
1 Broadus, " Matthew," p. 241.
2 " The Two St. Johns," p. 252. 3 II Cor. 3 : 10 f .
4 Stalker, "The Two St. Johns," p. 253.
8 Bruce, "Matthew," in loco. Cf. II Cor. 11.

242 JOHN THE LOYAL
take it by force." l Luke2 gives this saying in another
context and in a slightly different form. It is so
excessively difficult that we need all the light possible :
" The law and the prophets were until John : from
that time the gospel of the kingdom of God is preached
and every man entereth violently into it." 3 If the
translation in Luke is correct, the saying in Matthew4
probably corresponds with it. Zahn5 takes it to mean :
"the kingdom forces its way" like a mighty rushing
wind.6 That is true, for at that very moment the
kingdom of God under the leadership of Jesus was
forging ahead. But it is more than doubtful if it is
the correct interpretation. The use of "take it by
force"7 is against it. But it is not a hostile attack,
but the moral energy shown by those who seek to
enter the kingdom of God. It is thus a powerful pict
ure of the moral enthusiasm generated by John the
Baptist. He began the movement which, under Jesus,
was gathering momentum every day. "His preach
ing had led to a violent and impetuous thronging to
gather around Jesus and His disciples, a thronging in
which our Lord apparently saw as much unhealthy
excitement as true conviction." 8 It is probable that
by "men of violence" Jesus meant to describe "the
publicans and sinners" who welcomed him9 as they
had John.10 "For John came unto you in the way of
1 Matt. 11 : 12. 8 16 : 16.
' Kal 7r« eis ovtijk pidierai. The intransitive use of pid(op.ai is illustrated
in the inscriptions. Cf. Deissmann, "Bible Studies," p. 258.
4 it fjaaikeia top ovpavup Sid£erai, xat Stao-Tai dpnd£ovoiv avrqv.
5 "Evangelium zu Matt.," in loco.
8 Plummer, "Matthew," p. 162. ' iptrofovo-"' auTTjv equals attack.
8 Hort, " Judaistic Christianity," p. 26.
s Matt. 9 : 10. i» Luke 7 : 29.

APPRECIATION 243
righteousness, and ye believed him not : but the pub
licans and the harlots believed him." 1 Those who
responded to the message of John were not all of the
so-called respectable class. Many of them came from
the down-trodden class. In times of excitement such
work is sharply criticised by many. But certainly
Jesus is not here criticising John nor his converts.
These converts had many imperfections and short
comings, but they had at least this to their credit.
They had pushed on with eagerness into the kingdom
of heaven while the scribes and Pharisees held aloof
and criticised those who did enter in. "And ye, when
ye saw it, did not even repent yourselves afterward,
that ye might believe him." 2 But the movement in
augurated by John, whatever the shortcomings of
those swept on by it, was a proof of his power and
abiding influence. These very men of violence prove
John's great moral force and high prophetic endow
ment.3 " Christianity was born in a great revival," 4
and it has grown by means of revivals.
6. Rejection of Both John and Jesus. — It is not cer
tain how we are to take verses 29 and 30 in Luke 7 :
"And all the people when they heard, and the publi
cans, 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." Bruce,5 for instance, is absolutely certain
that the words are a historical reflection of the evange
list : " Its prosaic character, as compared with what
> Matt. 21 : 32. 2 Ibid.
3 Bruce, "Matthew," in loco. 4 Broadus, "Matthew," p. 241.
6 "Luke," in loco.

244 JOHN THE LOYAL
goes before and comes after, compels this conclusion,
as even Hahn admits. Then its absence from Mat
thew's account points in the same direction." The
Authorized Version had inserted "And the Lord
said" 1 in verse 31, to indicate that the two verses
preceding were remarks by Luke. But these words
are not genuine and do not appear in the Revised Ver
sion. It is possible that Luke did this to explain how
far John's work was really successful with the people.
But it is certainly strange to have such an extended
comment in the midst of a discourse of Jesus. Plum
mer2 considers it " without a parallel and improbable."
On the whole, therefore, it is best to take the words
as part of the address of Jesus. They really come in
very well after the paragraph in Matthew (not given
by Luke) about the violent energy displayed by men
in entering the kingdom of God. That enthusiasm
was true of some, but not of all. The people as a
whole justified God in sending John and accepted
baptism at his hands in proof of their attitude toward
him. It is to be feared that the great mass of these
did not possess the spiritual qualification demanded
by John for his baptism. But the fact that they sub
mitted to baptism by him showed that they believed
in his worth and the truth of his claims. And John
did "turn" many of the children of Israel to the Lord
their God as the angel had said to Zacharias.3 Some
of the disobedient were walking in the wisdom of the
just. A people was made ready for the Lord Messiah
1 el7re 8e 6 Kupios.
2 Plummer, "Luke," p. 205 t s Luke 1 : 17.

APPRECIATION 245
when he came. Even the publicans1 accepted his
baptism.2 "Wherever the publican penetrates, there
is no justice for any one." 3 It was just because the
mob, the am-ha-aretz, believed in John that the Phari
sees and the lawyers drew back. It was so as to Jesus.
"The Pharisees therefore answered them, Are ye also
led astray? Hath any of the rulers believed on him,
or of the Pharisees ? But this multitude which know
eth not the law are accursed." 4 The coming of
the publicans to the side of John drove the Pharisees
still further away.5 But it was God's counsel 6 that
even the Pharisees and lawyers7 should repent. In
truth, none needed repentance more.8 But the Phari
sees and lawyers (scribes) had come out against Jesus
also, so that Jesus does not consider their hostility to
John to his discredit.
So then in spite of all the enthusiasm excited by
John in some classes, the people had not really turned
from their sins. Least of all had the religious leaders
met the appeal of John, as was to have been expected.
As a matter of fact, John was now in prison partly
because the Pharisees had conspired with Herod
against him. This generation is not the one to be
casting stones at John. It lives in a glass house. He
has in mind, as is plain from Luke's report, chiefly
these religious leaders who are already jealous of Jesus
himself. "Whereunto shall I liken the men of this
• koI oi rekmvai. Here nal equals even. 2 Matt. 21 : 32.
3 Livy, quoted by Davis, " The Influence of Wealth in Imperial Rome,"
p. 27. 1910.
4 John 7 : 47 f. 8 Matt. 21 : 32. • tV /SovAijv tov tfeov.
7 oi vop.moi equals ypap.p.areU. These lawyers were ecclesiastical and
civil lawyers, but particularly ecclesiastical students.
8 Bruce, "Luke," in loco.

246 JOHN THE LOYAL
generation, and to what are they like ? They are like
unto children that sit in the market-place, and call
one to another; which say, We piped unto you and
ye did not dance; we wailed, and ye did not weep." 1
Bruce2 is not certain that this vivid parable was
spoken by Jesus at the same time as the rest of the
discourse. But surely this is hypercriticism, since
both Matthew and Luke report it so. It is perfecdy
natural that, after Jesus has pronounced his wonder
ful panegyric on John and his relation to himself with
some sketch of the success of his work, he should
turn to a characterization of the people among whom
John and Jesus have labored, especially those who
have rejected them. It is a sharp transition, but not
too sharp. The "but" here is not by way of dispar
agement of John, as is so often true of conversation.3
Jesus includes himself in this picture, which is in every
way like the style of Christ. Jesus had watched the
children at play in the market square. He dearly
loved children and their ways. One child played
chief mourner in the game of funeral, while the rest
wailed behind.4 Then one child played the pipe at
the game of wedding, while the rest danced at the
wedding. Then all grew tired and wanted a change.
Curiously enough this is the only place in the Bible
where a children's game is described.5 The parable
points its own application, but Jesus does not leave
the matter to chance. He expounds it himself. " For
John the Baptist is come, eating no bread nor drink-
' Luke 7 : 32. Cf. Matt. 11 : 16 f. 2 "Matthew," in loco.
* Stalker, "The Two St. Johns," p. 255. i Ibid., p. 256.
6 Broadus, " Matthew," p. 244.

APPRECIATION 247
ing wine; and ye say, He hath a devil. The Son of
Man is come eating and drinking; and ye say, Behold
a gluttonous man, and a winebibber, a friend of pub
licans and sinners! " 1 These children were petulant
and peevish. They revealed not the good, but the
bad, qualities of children. They were childish in the
extreme. Exactiy so the Pharisees and lawyers had
acted toward both John and Jesus. They were play
ing at religion2 like fretful children, who refused to
play if they could not have their way. They demanded
of John that he play like a Pharisee. They demand
the same of Jesus. But they are fickle and inconstant
in their criticisms. Both of the groups of children
found fault, if they were not the same group in reality.
That point is not made perfectly clear. In Matthew3
the correct text seems to draw a distinction between
the two groups of children, though that is not neces
sary. They played funeral and the most of them
disliked it. They played wedding and most of them
disliked that. In truth these fault-finding children
do not want to play at all unless they can have their
way about everything. John with his sternness and
ascetic habits was like playing funeral. He did not
eat or drink as most people did. The language is not
to be pressed too literally. It is less open to mis
understanding in Luke, who mentions bread and wine.
John did eat locusts and wild honey, and most assur
edly drank water, but he was unusually abstemious
» Luke 7 : 33 f. Cf. Matt. 7 : 19.
2 Bruce, "Matthew," in loco.
8 11 : 16. tois eTepots (Luke has dkk-qkois), not roU iratpois. BCDL
read in Matthew eTepow, but the word does not always mean "different."
It may still be equivalent to Luke's ikkykois.

248 JOHN THE LOYAL
in his diet. The reward that he received from the
Pharisees and lawyers, who acted with peevish child
ishness, was that they said : " He has a demon." He
was so peculiar, so different from other people. By
the use of "ye say" in Luke1 Jesus seems to imply
that some of these critics are present as he speaks.
If so, this fact partly explains his comment about the
Pharisees and lawyers.2 They had not only rejected
John's message and mission, but are now ridiculing
him.3 John had called the Pharisees and Sadducees
a brood of vipers for their hypocrisy. So now they
find a satisfactory retort in calling him crazy and pos
sessed with a demon. A lunatic was usually con
sidered demoniacal. The reality of demons is a per
plexing problem for many people at the present day.
The subject does not come before us in an acute form
at all in the ministry of John, since he did not cast out
demons or work other miracles. However, it may be
said in passing, that the modern researches in physi
ological psychology concerning the intimate relation
between mind and matter make it less difficult to
understand how spirits of evil, if they exist, can influ
ence human nature. Certainly, the intense profan
ity, blasphemy and love of evil in some deranged per
sons make plausible the idea of possession, whether
cause or effect. It is possible that, when one has
lost his mental balance, he is less able to resist the
spirits of evil who, in some cases, take possession of
him and greatly intensify the physical and mental
malady. The existence of the devil is the chief diffi-
1 7 : 33 f. 2 Luke 7 : 29 f. 3 Broadus, " Matthew," p. 244.

APPRECIATION 249
culty concerning the question of demons. The origin
of evil is a dark and dreadful problem from any point
of view. But it is not rendered easier by denying the
existence of the devil or of demons. One can easily
call to mind men and women who seem bent on evil.1
In the case of John it is, of course, slander pure and
simple. The Pharisees had already said 2 that Jesus
did his miracles by the prince of demons. He was
able to drive out demons because he was in league
with their prince, the devil himself. They will very
soon repeat this very accusation against Jesus, who
will expose their hypocrisy in making it by showing
that, if it were true, Satan would be casting out Satan,
an absolute absurdity.3 The charge against John was
due to jealousy on the part of the Pharisees, as it
plainly was in respect to Jesus.4
They would not play funeral with John, nor will
they play wedding with Jesus. Jesus had attended a
wedding5 early in his ministry. He had, unlike John,
mingled in the social life of the people. The Pharisees
were quick to find fault with him for that. He was
so different from John. He played wedding, not
funeral.6 The two criticisms cancel one another.
But fault-finders are not bothered by inconsistency.
The excuses advanced merely betray an attitude of
mind and heart, not the real motive. They feared
John's "glittering axe" and "the winnowing fan of
Jesus."7 That was the real motive. They feared
1 Cf . Broadus, " Matthew," p. 189 f. 2 Matt. 9 : 34.
3 Matt. 12 : 24-26; Mark 3 : 22 ff. 4 Matt. 12 : 23 ff.
8 John 2 : 1-11.
8 Stalker, "The Two St. Johns," p. 257. ' Ibid.

250 JOHN THE LOYAL
and hated both John and Jesus. The Pharisees
slandered John by saying : " He is a littie off. He
has a demon. You will have to excuse him for what
he says. That is why he called us a brood of vipers.
That is why he lives on locusts and wild honey and
dresses so queerly. That is why he talks in such an
excited manner about the Messiah and the kingdom.
That is why he has gotten into all this trouble with
Herod. It is best just to pay no attention to his talk."
They slandered Jesus by saying : " He is a regular
glutton.1 He eats everything in sight. He is a wine
bibber,2 and, worst of all, he is a friend of publicans
and sinners. He is a regular man of the world and
no ecclesiastic and certainly not religious. He is an
unsafe man in religion and morals." Jesus was not
over-sensitive to criticism, and he does not mention
the pitiful narrowness of the Pharisees because he was
unduly irritated. He is not ashamed of being the
friend of publicans and sinners. It is one of the chief
glories of Jesus that he could reach the lost, and he
knew it and claimed it.3 The term "friend" is here
"used in a sinister sense, and implies that Jesus was
the comrade of the worst of characters, and like them
in conduct. A malicious nick-name at first, it is now
a name of honour : the sinner's lover. The Son of
Man takes these calumnies as a thing of course and
goes on His gracious way." 4
1 ifr&yos equals eater, but they mean "eater" with emphasis, a voracious
gormandizer. 2 oii-oiroTris equals drinker of wine. The light wine used at that time
was generally mixed with water and was about as strong as our tea or
coffee. Cf. Broadus, "Matthew," p. 244.
3 Luke 5:31f.; 15: 1-32.
i Bruce, "Matthew," p. 175 f.

APPRECIATION 251
7. The Consolation. — What is one to do about such
a situation? John had gone boldly about and done
his duty. He has not escaped trouble, but he did
right and his vindication will come. The course of
Jesus spoke for itself. He was certainly not pander
ing to popular favor nor to ecclesiastical power. He
was not seeking to curry favor with the rulers nor to
excite the prejudices of the masses. In the case of
both John and Jesus "wisdom is justified by her
works." J So the true text in Matthew reads.2 Luke3
has it : " Wisdom is justified of all her children." In
Luke the children who are wise are the ones who jus
tify wisdom. The foolish children will carp and
criticise as the Pharisees and lawyers have done
toward John and Jesus. But the faithful minority
welcome John and Jesus. The report in Matthew
puts the emphasis on the works done by the children
of wisdom. It is the appeal to fruit which was in
sisted on by both John4 and Jesus.5 In the long run
wisdom is justified by the life and deeds of those who
practise the truth.6 Wisdom is here personified as in
the Wisdom Books of the Old Testament.7 But, even
if "children" be the right meaning in Matthew, it
does not mean that wisdom is justified from the at
tacks of her children. The true idea is that the
method of John and that of Jesus are both justified
by results.8 It is not likely that Jesus is here quoting
1 Matt. 11 : 19. iSixaubfrn % aofyia d-irb T&v epyaiv avTjjj.
2 Many manuscripts read rtiamv as in Luke, but KB have epytav.
3 7 : 36. 4 Matt. 3:8. 8 Matt. 7 : 20.
8 Bruce, " Matthew," in loco.
7 Cf. Prov. 8, 9. So Sirach 24; Wisdom of Solomon 6-8.
8 Plummer, "Matthew," p. 163.

252 JOHN THE LOYAL
from his critics who sneered at his followers with the
remark that time would tell how they would hold out.1
That is, alas, too often the case. Jesus speaks of the
matter as already a fact.2 It is always true, and cer
tain to be so in the case of those who have taken the
side of John and Jesus against the Pharisees. The
word "justify" here is the one so freely used by Paul
with the notion of declaring one righteous. Wisdom
will be pronounced right in the end. Folly may usurp
the leadership for a time, but in the very nature of things
that situation of things cannot last. John had friends
in spite of the ill-fortune that had come upon him.
These men are the wise ones. Time has rolled on.
Where to-day is the man who will stand up for the
Pharisees and lawyers against John and Jesus ? The
verdict of history is with John and Jesus. The men
who do a wrong to gain a temporary triumph have a
short-lived glory. The courage of John and of Jesus
in the midst of opposition and misrepresentation is an
inspiration to every exponent of truth and righteous
ness. "Every sort of preacher will be found fault
with by the ungodly world; but every truly devout
and wise preacher will be justified by the effects of
his ministry." 3 The true preacher to-day must have
the vision of Moses who "looked away4 unto the
recompense of reward," "accounting the reproach of
Christ greater riches than the treasures of Egypt,"
who "endured, as seeing him who is invisible." 5 He
1 Bruce, "Luke,'.' in loco, opposes this notion of Bornemann.
2 eSiKauiiJij. Timeless aorist.
3 Broadus, " Matthew," p. 245.
4 a-iripkenev equals kept looking away (imperfect). 8 Heb. 11 : 26 f.

APPRECIATION 253
may get a living from the children of wisdom or he
may not, for even they are fickle and not always re
sponsive, but he must sustain himself by the con
sciousness of duty done and the approval of Jesus.
The spiritual conception of life, the constant vision of
the unseen God, is the chief incentive to work in the
ministry, the chief reward for the privations inevita
bly experienced. The people grow dull and listless.
"One day it is too hot, another too cold; one church
is too empty, another too full; one preacher is too
learned, another not learned enough, one congrega
tion is too genteel, another too common." 1 The
people may be fickle, but the preacher must be faith
ful. Jesus knows all about that problem.
1 Stalker, "The Two St. Johns," p. 257.

CHAPTER XI
MARTYRDOM
"Give me here in a charger the head of John the Bap
tist" (Matt. 14 : 8).
1. Herodias Biding Her Time. — Luke1 mentions
the bare fact of the death of John in connection with
its influence on Herod Antipas. The details of this
terrible tragedy are told with more fulness by Mark,2
who is followed in briefer form by Matthew.3 But
for superstitious fears of Herod about Jesus as John
redivivus we might have no report of the details of
John's death in the gospels.4 It is a horrible story,
but it is necessary to know the worst that befell John.
There was no change in the attitude of Herodias
toward him. With the persistence and stealth of a
tigress she watched for her opportunity. She was
sure that it would come. Herod at times had "the
murderous mood," 5 but it vanished with him under
nobler impulses. With Herodias it did not vanish.
It was her settled purpose,6 " and she desired 7 to kill
him." In the nature of the case there could be but
one issue in this matter when a furious woman like
1 9 : 7-9. 2 6 : 14-29. » 14 : 1-12.
4 Bruce, " Mark," in loco. 8 Ibid.
6 Mark 6 : 19. Whether we supply xdAoi> with ivelxev (equals had a
grudge) or not (equals fixed hate).
7 fiaekev. Imperfect. 254

MARTYRDOM 255
Herodias was bent on John's blood. Her only ob
stacle was Herod himself, who was enamoured of her.
He was too weak to stand out against the will of his
wife. It may be placed, however, to the credit of
Herod that he resisted her direct attacks in spite of
impulses to yield.1 The convenient day2 came on the
birthday3 of Herod. Herod may have felt that he
had to make public announcement of his marriage
with Herodias on this occasion.4 Herodias may have
feared that on this occasion Herod might fall again
under the spell of John's power and yield to his advice
and dismiss her from court in disgrace. The feast
was to be celebrated at the palace at Machserus.
Herod may have chosen this palace for the celebration
pardy because it had recently belonged to Aretas, the
father of his former wife. That may have been the
plan of Herodias to give a little added sting to the
daughter of Aretas, whom she had displaced. Here
then are assembled at Herod's invitation "his lords
and the high captains and the chief men of Galilee." 5
They were the magnates, the military officers and the
men of importance.6 It was a splendid gathering of
the grandees of Galilee. It was in itself a defiance of
John, for the feast in the palace was not far from
John's prison. Did John suspect the crisis in his
1 Geike, "Life and Words of Jesus," vol. I, p. 429.
2 nuepa? evKaipov. Mark 6 : 21.
8 tow yeveaioK. Cf. Gen. 40 : 20 ff . In Attic Greek rd yevi&kia was the
word used for offerings on birthdays and then for birthdays, rd yeviaia
being used for offerings for the dead. But in the later Greek yeviaia is
used for birthdays also.
4 Reynolds, "John the Baptist," p. 439. ...
8 Mark 6 : 21. Tots pieyurrdaiv abroi <toi tois x'*"»PX°« ««' T0« »/»>«>« T
Takikaias. 8 Cf . Acts 26 : 1 ff.

256 JOHN THE LOYAL
affairs? At any rate Herodias was more than ever
on the alert and was determined that John should
be gotten out of the way. His very presence at
Machserus was intolerable.
2. The Dance of Herodias. — The main function in
the celebration of the birthday festivities was the
dinner.1 The guests had eaten much and drunk the
various wines. Herod himself, as host and as the
one in whose honor the feast was given, had to lead in
the potations. Herodias had laid her plans well.
"The vulture was swooping on her prey." 2 "As the
procession wound up the mountain pass, with the
bravery of nuptial banners and music, and while
Roman officers with flashing armour and plumed
helmets rode as body-guard of the princesses, and
all the grandees and wealthy lords of Galilee and
Perea were gathering from various approaches to this
eagle's eyrie, and when the garrison stood forth and
presented arms as the great nobles entered the gates,
and the city crowd of many tribes — among them
Greeks and Bedouins, white-robed Essenes and Ori
ental traffickers, priests and Levites from Jerusalem,
and disciples of the prophet eager for his release —
sent up their shout of welcome; accustomed as men
in that age were to deeds of vengeance and blood, it
could hardly have occurred to any that the veiled
ladies of the court were revolving a murderous plot,
as godless and foul as any that had already stained the
1 8eIiri'o>'. It was in the evening, but the formal dinner. Cf . the dinner
by Herod Agrippa I to the Emperor Caius in order to win a favor (Jose
phus, "Ant.," xviii, 8, 7).
2 Reynolds, "John the Baptist," p. 440.

MARTYRDOM 257
annals of the house of Herod." 1 And now the hour
has come. Herodias had to stoop to the very depths
of degradation in order to carry her point. But she
had become desperate and her very nearness to John
probably irritated her beyond endurance. It is pos
sible that John may have heard the sound of revelry.
One is reminded of the feast of Belteschazzar2 and the
handwriting on the wall. Herodias was willing to use
the physical charms of her own daughter by her
former husband,3 Herod Philip, to gain her purpose.
When maudlin with drink she knew that Hef od would
prove an easy mark to the lascivious dance which she
had trained Salome to execute. It was and is a com
mon Oriental custom4 to have dancing-girls come in
at the close of the feast and dance for the delectation
of the guests. Jewish maidens had danced of old at
times of public rejoicing with no thought of disgrace,
but this was a religious act.5 The Greeks had their
hetairof who performed at such functions, and finally
the Romans fell in with the ways of the voluptuous
East. But a Latin inscription reads : " It was dis
graceful both to dance and for a virgin to come into
the banqueting-hall to men who had drank freely." 7
It would have been demoniacal enough for Herodias
to have hired a professional dancing-girl, whose char-
1 Reynolds, " John the Baptist," p. 440 f . 2 Dan. 5.
3 The reading Tijs dvyarpb* abrob 'HpipSidSos (equals his daughter Hero
dias) is accepted by Westcott and Hort. If true, it can mean only his
daughter by marriage (step-daughter) and that she was named Herodias
as well as Salome.
4 Cf. the Hindoo nautch-girls.
8 Broadus, " Matthew," p. 318. Cf. Ex. 15 : 20; I Sam. 18 : 6; II Sam.
6:21. 8 eTaipau Public characters like the Japanese geisha girls.
7 Quoted by Broadus, "Matthew," p. 318.

258 JOHN THE LOYAL
acter and reputation were already lost, to come and
make the licentious dance for the purpose of over
coming Herod with her charms. But the very bottom
of iniquity is reached when Herodias prostitutes her
own daughter to that foul purpose. It is an unspeak
able commentary on the corruption of the times, and
more than justifies all that John the Baptist had ever
said about her if it needs any justification in any one's
mind. The daughter had been thoroughly drilled in
her part, perhaps only too willing a victim, for she was
the daughter of her mother. At the proper moment
Salome was to come to Herodias for further instruc
tions, when once she has Herod in her power. That
is not all, however, bad as it is now. By the marriage of
Herodias with Herod the daughter is a member of the
court. She was already a princess of royal blood, a
great-granddaughter of Herod the Great. The mali
ciousness of Herodias would not brook defeat. She
was willing to stoop to any humiliation in order to
conquer. "The music and the wine and the laugh
ter are all at their height, and the sounds of the rev
elry reverberate through the marble corridors. Purple
shadows of the mountain peaks are beginning to fall
across the deep ravines, and to shroud the towers of
the fortress in their gloom." 1 Then at the auspicious
moment, long planned by Herodias, " the daughter of
Herodias herself came in and danced." 2 Matthew3
remarks that she "danced in the midst," right in the
presence of the whole company. The dance was a
bewildering success from the point of Herodias, and
1 Reynolds, " John the Baptist," p. 441. 2 Mark 6 : 22. 8 14 : 6.

MARTYRDOM 259
Salome "pleased Herod and them that sat at meat
with him." J Herod became oblivious of the fact that
it was his wife's daughter who had shown such be
wildering grace and "daredevil sauciness." 2 The
guests greeted her performance with tumultuous ap
plause. Herod is now excited beyond all bounds.
The girl dances on and the half-drunken crowd be
come tempestuous with excitement. Herod is wholly
in the girl's power. "Ask of me whatsoever thou wilt,
and I will give it thee." Apparendy Salome ignores
his remark and dances away. Herod probably leaps
up. At any rate he now swears to her: "Whatsoever
thou shalt ask of me, I will give it thee, unto the half
of my kingdom." 3 Perhaps Herod in his drunken
excitement is reminded of Esther and Ahasuerus. He
feels his own importance and is grandiloquent in his
generosity. It was the custom for the dancing-girls
on such occasions to receive presents. Herod will be
equal to the occasion and will reward such magnificent
dancing. As a matter of fact, he could not give away
a bit of his kingdom without the consent of Csesar.
Mark 4 here calls Herod "king," and Herod speaks of
his "kingdom." That was common usage, a matter
of courtesy, not meant to be taken literally. But
Herod had made his promise, a public promise, and
with an oath. This was the victory.
3. The Demand of Herodias. — Salome knew well
how to play her part. At this juncture " she went out,
1 Mark 6 : 22. Reclined, avvava*eip.evotx, according to Oriental custom.
2 Stalker, "The Two St. Johns," p. 267.
8 Mark 6 : 23. One thinks of Esther 5 : 3 f .
4 6 : 22 f. Cf. Matt. 14 : 9. Cf. Smith, " Days of His Flesh," pp. 229 f.

260 JOHN THE LOYAL
and said to her mother, What shall I ask ? " J Hero
dias had herself remained outside of the hall, not to
betray her hand too clearly. The ladies were not ex
pected in the banqueting-hall. Matthew2 says that
Salome, "being put forward by her mother," made
her request at once. There is no contradiction here.
Matthew merely passes by the detail of the visit out
side to her mother. It was all done in a moment.
The spell must not be broken. Herodias did not
need time for reflection. She had only to say, "The
head of John the Baptist." Her hour had come at
last. She had waited long for triumph and now it
was at hand. She would soon see the silent lips that
would never more malign her. Salome "came in
straightway with haste." 3 There was no time to
lose. The fires of drink and passion must not be
allowed to cool. The conscience of Herod must not
be given a chance to get control of him. The daughter
of Herodias was not apparently abashed by the hor
rible request of her mother. She evidently knew her
mother well. Indeed, Salome acted with so much
glee that she probably shared her mother's resent
ment against John, and was glad of the chance to put
him out of the way. Whether she was in her mother's
secret before this moment is not made clear. But,
when she hears her mother's word, she does not hesi
tate. She said with unblushing effrontery to Herod
Antipas : " I will that thou give me forthwith in a
charger the head of John the Baptist." 4 She wishes
1 Mark 6 : 24. 2 14 : 8. irpoSipWtWa. » Mark 6 : 25.
I Mark 6 : 25. Cf. Luke 11 : 39 for "charger," inl irivaxi here.

MARTYRDOM 261
the head "forthwith." She has taken Herod at his
word. "In hotter haste than Herodias herself she
seeks to clutch the ghastly trophy of her rage and
spite." J She was apparentiy glad also to show her
power over her step-father,2 this "wretched offspring
of the once noble Maccabees," "out of whom all
maidenhood and all princeliness have been brazed by
a degenerate mother." 3 Did a shiver run through
the crowd of men that so beautiful a girl could be so
blood-thirsty? It was enough to bring them all to
their senses.
4. The Maudlin Acquiescence of Herod. — He was
squarely caught in the trap set by Herodias. He was
tipsy, but he knew that he would be the butt of ridicule.
He was not willing to face the laugh of his companions.
He cared more for what people would say of him than
for what was right or wrong. He belongs to that class
"to whom a breach of the decalogue is less dreadful
than a breach of etiquette." 4 Herod's sorrow5 was
probably sincere. John had made a marvellous im
pression upon the mind and conscience of this un
principled ruler.6 His perplexity now reached a cul
mination. He feared the multitude. He knew that
it was wrong, and, what was worse, that it would
be unpopular, for the people counted John as a
prophet.7 So Herod did not join in the laughter of
the revellers at " the pretty wickedness" 8 of the merry
1 Reynolds, "John the Baptist," p. 442.
2 Swete, " Mark," in loco.
8 Edersheim, "Life and Times," vol. I, p. 672.
4 Plummer, " Matthew," p. 202.
8 wepikuiros yev6p.evas. Mark 6 : 20.
7 Matt. 14 : 5. Cf. Broadus, "Matthew," p. 320.
8 Stalker, "The Two St. Johns," p. 268.

262 JOHN THE LOYAL
dancer. He is probably superstitious and hesitates at
such a cold-blooded murder, but he has "a nest of
scorpions in his bosom." x But what he dreaded
most of all was Herodias, " the blood-thirsty Fury," 2
whom he must meet. She would tell him that he
had violated a gentleman's " code of honor " 3 and
was beneath contempt. He had not kept his word,
his promise, his oath. So, while the girl waits for her
reward,4 he trembles for a moment in sore distress
between the disgrace that was inevitable, if he refused
to stand by his word, and the dread of John and his
own conscience, if he yielded to the demand of Hero
dias through Salome. Fear conquered, and he caught
at his oath as his excuse. " For the sake of his oath,
and of them that sat at meat, he would not reject her." 5
He was afraid to give Salome a public slight6 and add
her fury to that of Herodias. A rash promise better
broken than kept. So he gave the order for a soldier7
of his guard to bring in John's head. This soldier
was a sort of spy or scout kept to be on the lookout
like a picket or to carry messages. It is sometimes
objected that Herod could not have given such a com
mand at such a time, but Broadus8 reminds us that
"Herodias' ancestor, Alexander Jannseus, while hold
ing a feast with his concubines, commanded eight hun-
1 Reynolds, "John the Baptist," p. 442.
2 Stalker, "The Two St. Johns," p. 268.
3 Smith, "Days of His Flesh," p. 230. Cf. ". Herod.," ix, 109- Ovid.
"Met.," ii, 44-52; "Jud.," xi, 30-35.
4 Broadus, " Matthew," p. 320.
8 Mark 6 : 26. Cf. Matt. 14 : 9.
" i&erriaai equals set aside.
7 aireKovkdropa equals Latin "speculator." Cf. Greek aite'irTouon. No
where else in New Testament.
8 "Matthew," p. 320. Cf. Josephus, "Ant.," xiii, 14, 2.

MARTYRDOM 263
dred rebels to be crucified in full view, and their wives
and children to be slain before their eyes."
5. The Death of John. — The gospels have drawn
the veil of silence over this dreadful scene.1 Mark
merely states the melancholy fact : " And beheaded
him in the prison." But our thoughts inevitably turn
from the revelry and horror of the banqueting-hall to
the cell of John the Baptist. He doubtless knew of
the presence of his enemies in the palace by the glitter
and glare of the festival. Sounds of laughter and of
applause may have reached his ears. Was John
asleep when the scout came to the door of his dungeon ?
It was now doubtless far into the night. Was he be
headed in his sleep? Did he go to sleep never to
wake again on earth, but to awaken in heaven?
That is possible. He may have been hurriedly awa
kened and then beheaded.2 If so, "when the appa
rition of death confronted John so suddenly, how did he
receive it ? " 3 Did he still have his great doubt4 about
Jesus ? Did he feel the love of life that is natural in
one so young ? Is it not possible, yea, probable, that
the message of Jesus in reply to John's pathetic ap
peal had removed 5 the last lingering doubt ? He
had been in prison more than a year, but his death
was sudden after all. In the case of Paul it was
different. Paul was an old man, and he felt sure that
his work was accomplished. He faced death with
calmness and content. He knew his fate. We have
1 Swete, " Mark," in loco.
2 Broadus, " Matthew," p. 320.
3 Stalker, "The Two St. Johns," p. 269. 4 Ibid., p. 269.
s Broadus, "Matthew " p. 320.

264 JOHN THE LOYAL
no word from John as to his own emotions and out
look. Had Herod given him a word of hope ? John
must have looked death in the face many a time dur
ing the long year of his confinement. Perhaps at
times he may have longed for it to come. It is not
dreadful to die suddenly "if one has lived the life of
faith." 1 Did John know that Herodias was respon
sible for his death ? Let us hope that he did not know
that a lewd dancing-girl, though of royal blood, had
literally danced his head off. The head of the greatest
of the prophets fell as the price of the rude oath of a
Herod in a tipsy mood to his voluptuous charmer.
The scene is inconceivably horrible. We turn away
from it in revolt. And yet " this murder of the great
est of the prophets was in itself hardly so shocking a
sight as the scene yonder in the banqueting-hall." 2
6. The Gift to Herodias. — The disgusting demand
was carried out to the letter. The scout of Herod
brought the head of John on a charger. "There stood
the maiden, her cheek still flushed with her recent
exertion, while the guests sought to drown their pain
ful emotions in wine." 3 The executioner comes in
with his ghastly trophy4 to present to the fair damsel.
She acts her part out probably with the same gay and
flippant manner that marked her dancing and her
demoniacal request.5 The soldier passed it on to
Salome " and she brought it to her mother." 6 She
bore it as a treasure. Mark7 adds simply : " And the
1 Broadus, "Matthew," p. 320. * Ibid. 'Ibid.
' Smith, " Days of His Flesh," p. 230.
s Stalker, "The Two St. Johns," p. 268.
¦ Matt. 14:11. 7 6- 28

MARTYRDOM 2G5
damsel gave it to her mother." What a gift, this noble
head dripping with blood! Salome no doubt "took
it daintily in her hands lest a drop of blood should stain
her gala dress, and tripped away to her mother, as if
bearing her some choice dish of food from the king's
table." J The victor often had the head of his fallen
foe brought before him. The ancient civilizations had
not gotten beyond that species of barbarism which is
still practised by modern savages. Fulvia, the wife
of Antony, spat upon Cicero's head, drew out the once
eloquent tongue and pierced it repeatedly with her
hair-pin. That tongue would never denounce her
nor her husband again.2 We do not know how
Herodias behaved. It is not difficult to imagine her
look of triumph as her eyes flashed satisfaction upon
the mouth that had denounced her sins, the eyes that
had made her cower with dread and hate. Jerome,3
indeed, tells a story of the way in which Herodias took
her bodkin and pricked the tongue of John, the tongue
that now could rebuke her no more. It is probably
a mere tradition, but Herodias was none too good to
do such a thing in the first moments of her passion.
It would be so Roman, besides, and she had lived in
Rome. She has triumphed over the mighty preacher
before whose voice a nation once quailed. "She re
mained Herod's evil genius to the end. The death of
the Baptist filled the tetrarch's subjects with horror." 4
i Broadus, " Matthew," p. 320. Salome afterward married her uncle,
Philip the Tetrarch, and, according to legend, died from a fall on the ice.
Cf. "Niceph." I, 20.
2 Cf . Broadus, " Matthew," p. 320; Stalker, " The Two St. Johns," p. 268.
"Contra Rufin., c. 11, quoted by Witsius. Cf. Reynolds, "John the
Baptist," p. 443.
4 Stalker, "The Two St. Johns," p. 269.

266 JOHN THE LOYAL
Aretas made war on Herod for his treatment of his
daughter and Herod was defeated. Some of the
Jews "thought that the destruction of Herod's army
came from God, and that very justly, as a punishment
of what he did against John." 1 Herodias's turn will
come. Some ten years afterward, when her scape
grace brother Agrippa is appointed by the Emperor
Caligula to be king of the tetrarchy of Philip, she is so
envious that she gives Herod Antipas no rest till they
go to Rome to demand the title of king for Herod.
But Agrippa makes counter-charges so that they are
sent in banishment and disgrace to Gaul or Spain.2
Herodias is now in her glory. She cares naught for
the shame of her daughter nor for the embarrassment
of Herod. She has carried her point and has a
Satanic delight in that. "They did unto him what
soever they would." 3 John has met his turn. That
of Jesus will come next. "Even so shall the Son of
Man also suffer of them." 4
7. The Burial. — "And his disciples came and took
up the corpse, and buried him." 5 These disciples
were probably on the hill at the time, though it is not
certain. One may at least hope so, for otherwise the
headless body of the Baptist lay all night and most of
the next day in neglect in the dungeon. But John's
disciples did hear6 of the tragedy. The news would
spread quickly all over the palace. It was a melan
choly duty, but these disciples were loyal to John as
1 Josephus, " Ant.," xviii, 5, 2.
2 Josephus, " Ant.," xviii,' 7, 2; "War," ii, 9, 6. Smith (" Days of His
Flesh," p. 230) calls Herodias "that she-devil."
8 Mark 9 : 13. 4 Matthew, 17 : 12.
8^Matt. 14 : 12. • Mark 6 : 29.

MARTYRDOM 267
he was loyal to Jesus. They laid his body in a tomb,1
probably in one of the rock-hewn tombs around Ma
chserus. There is a late story that John's body was
found at Sebaste (Samaria), in the time of the Emperor
Julian, when his bones were burnt and most of the
dust scattered by the pagan party, the rest being kept
by the Christians as relics.2 But little credence is to
be placed in that report. It is not inconceivable that
disciples of John may have removed the body of their
Master from Machserus. If the burial was at Ma
chserus, it was probably hurried. John's disciples
would be too dazed for utterance. He has been
cut down in his prison, but his life was not in vain.
Courage and humility were combined in John in a
remarkable way. He practised self-denial, not merely
preached it for others. "Had his honors been ten
thousand times brighter than they were, he would
have laid them all at Christ's feet. John in his min
istry was not like the evening star — sinking into the
darkness of the night, but like the morning star — lost
to our view in the brightness of day." 3 They have
killed him, but at the cost of eternal infamy to them
selves, the execration of mankind, misery untold to
their own hearts and lives. The blood of the mar
tyrs is the seed of the church. In one sense John was
the first of the Christian martyrs, though Stephen is
usually so designated.4 He has met death in the path
of duty. He lived like a saint, he preached like a
prophet, he died like a hero.
1 iv p.vqfieiat.
2 Swete, " Mark," in loco. ' Belfrage in Kitto.
4 Broadus, "Matthew," p. 320.

268 JOHN THE LOYAI
8. Telling Jesus. — " And they went and told Jesus." ]
They knew not where to go but to Jesus. Not long
ago John himself had sent two of them to Jesus with
a message of doubt. Now they bear to Jesus the word
of despair. How could a man like Herod and a
woman like Herodias be allowed to slay John the
Baptist? The mystery of evil remains unsolved.2
What has the world now in store for the disciples of
John? What will Jesus say? What did he say?
We are not told. But Jesus loved John. He wept
by the grave of Lazarus. He had already pronounced
the noblest eulogy on John. Did he not drop a tear
for John, whose mission was so closely allied to his
own ? Did his own heart not grieve at the dastardly
deed that had taken John away in such lawless, bar
barous fashion? Did he not speak words of comfort
to the sorrowing disciples of John ? Did he not draw
them closer to himself ? They had no possible grounds
for jealousy now. John's momentary doubt had van
ished. They go to Jesus with " a true instinct." 3
It was what John would have advised. Indeed, he
may have told them what to do in case the inevitable
end came suddenly upon him. " They went to Jesus"
with many thoughts on all the wondrous events of the
last few years. " Ah, blessed road, whereon thousands
upon thousands have followed them since! It is the
right road, whatever be the trouble." 4 We leave Jesus
with memories of John, with prophecies of his own
fate. He was walking in the footsteps of his great
1 Matt. 14 : 12. »cai ik&bvreq airqyyeikav rd\ 'Itjo'oC.
2 Stalker, " The Two St. Johns," p. 270. ' 8 Ibid.
4 Ibid.

MARTYRDOM 269
Forerunner. His own hour was hastening. The
clock was running round and would strike. How
littie the people understand the tragedy of soul which
is going on in the heart of Jesus as he steps forward
to meet his cross. Matthew1 represents Jesus as
leaving the dominion of Herod Antipas as soon as he
heard the news of John's death : " Now when Jesus
heard it he withdrew from thence in a boat to a desert
place apart." Jesus went into the tetrarchy of Herod
Philip and is in Galilee very little thereafter. Act
cording to Mark2 Jesus withdrew after hearing the
report of the disciples when they returned from their
preaching tour over Galilee. The two events prob
ably came close together.3 Herod did become much
concerned about the work of Jesus so that his de
parture was wise.4
i 14 : 13. 2 6 : 30 f.
3 Broadus, "Matthew," p. 322; Bruce, "Matthew," inloco.
I Matt. 14 : 1 f.; Mark 6 : 14; Luke 9 : 7.

CHAPTER XII
LINGERING ECHOES
" John baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying
unto the people that they should believe on him that
should come after him, that is, on Jesus" (Acts 19 : 4).
1. A Terror to Herod. — The court of Herod Antipas
left Machserus after the birthday festival was over.
It had been a magnificent occasion with lavish extrav
agance and splendor of entertainment. The dance
of Salome had given a peculiar zest to the celebra
tion and was for long the talk of the guests. The
daring of Herodias and her daughter in demanding
the head of John the Baptist was something of a
shock, but, the grandees argued, one must get used to
such things if he moved in court circles. He must not
be too particular nor squeamish about small matters.
As a matter of fact, John was a mere adventurer, a re
ligious demagogue, who gained his importance purely
from his favor with the masses. It was for this reason
that Herod had wished his endorsement of the mar
riage with Herodias. If he had shut his eyes to that
weakness of Herod and treated it as un fait accompli,
he would be still alive and the people would have fol
lowed him in his endorsement of Herod's marriage.
Princes, the courtiers would argue, cannot be held to
270

LINGERING ECHOES 271
the ordinary rules of morality to which other people
are expected to conform. One in court circles must
have a blind eye to many things. After all John had
brought his fate on himself by his bluntness, ill
manners, and lack of common-sense. He had no
policy, no suavity, no spirit of accommodation. It
was a pity, but he had only himself to blame in his
resistance to the will of Herodias. Thus the flatterers
of Herod's court probably argued and satisfied them
selves with litde regret about John. The actual out
come was rather bad in its details, as there was no
formal trial, but the thing had happened, and now
"On with the dance,
Let joy be unconfined."
The court is again at Tiberias with all its wonted
brilliance. Herod Antipas, with all his faults and sins, was not
wholly degenerate as was Herodias. Herod's con
science still worked occasionally. He was supersti
tious also. John had troubled him while in prison.
He had been "much perplexed" x what to do about
him. He is "much perplexed"2 now that John is
dead. Herod had John on the brain.3 "It is said
that when Theodoric had ordered the murder of Sym-
machus, he was haunted and finally maddened by the
phantom of the old man's distorted features glaring
at him from a dish on the table; nor can it have been
otherwise with Herod Antipas."4 In spite of his
1 Mark 6 : 20. mkkd ijirdpei.
2 Luke 9 : 7. Si-nnbpv.. Note imperfect tense and Sia.
8 Bruce, " Matthew," in loco.
4 Farrar, "Life of Christ," vol. I, p. 394.

272 JOHN THE LOYAL
maudlin condition at the feast, Herod had seen the
head of John the Baptist on the charger. He saw the
sightless eyes many a night as they glared at him out
of the darkness from the foot of his bed and charged
him with the murder of John. He could still hear
that wonderful voice as it accused him of his sins of
which he knew his guilt. "If we mistake not, that
dissevered head was rarely henceforth absent from
Herod's haunted imagination from that day forward
till he lay upon his dying bed." 1 He was tasting hell
beforehand. The lashing of a guilty conscience is
hell. News came to the golden palace of Herod in Tibe
rias about a new prophet in Galilee. Jesus himself
had studiously avoided Tiberias, Herod's capital. It
may seem strange that Herod had not heard of Jesus
before this time. In reply it may be stated that Herod
was often away from Tiberias and sometimes outside
of his own dominions. A prince often knows less
about what is going on than his subjects.2 He may,
in truth, have heard of Jesus in an incidental way
that made no impression on him. The religious move
ments among his people probably concerned him very
little. Jesus had been actively at work in Galilee
for over a year.3 He had labored all over Galilee,
and particularly at Bethsaida, Capernaum, Chorazin,
which places were not far1 from Tiberias. It was not,
however, the mere fact of the preaching of Jesus or
even of his works that excited at this time. It was
1 Farrar, "Life of Christ," vol. I, p. 394.
2 Plummer, " Matthew," p. 200. 8 Broadus, " Matthew," p. 315.

LINGERING ECHOES 273
the explanation of the power of Jesus that agitated
him. The tour of the twelve aposdes was just com
pleted, and much talk about Jesus was the result.
People were trying to explain Jesus. The Pharisees
had already said that he was in league with the devil.1
But the masses righdy attributed that explanation to
jealousy. Some of the people said that Jesus was
one of the old prophets risen again to life.2 The peo
ple had an expectation that Jeremiah would return
to life.3 Others thought Jesus a prophet equal ' to
any of the Old Testament prophets, "as one of the
prophets." Some, who had not seen that John the
Baptist was Elijah in spirit and power, and who ex
pected Elijah back in person, wondered if Jesus might
not be Elijah himself. " It is Elijah," they said. He
has appeared at last.4 These knew that John had
refused to be identified with Elijah. But there was a
group, who apparently knew nothing of the early
ministry of Jesus that was parallel with that of John,
who said: "This is John the Baptist; he is risen
from the dead." 5 There is a late story to the effect
that Jesus and John resembled each other in per
sonal appearance, or rather Origen6 suggests the idea.
John wrought no miracles, but the advocates of this
view used the miracles of Jesus as one element in the
proof that he is John redivivus. John can now work
so many and such wonderful miracles because he has
come back from the grave. "Therefore do these
1 Matt. 12 : 24 f. 2 Mark 6:15; Luke 9 : 8.
8 Matt. 16 : 14. Cf. Sirach 19 : 10 f. 4 Mark 6 : 15; Luke 9 : 8.
6 Matt. 14 : 2; Mark 6 : 14; Luke 9 : 7.
8 On John 6 : 30. Cf. his notes on Matt. 10 : 20.

274 JOHN THE LOYAL
powers work in him." 1 " The powers of the invisible,
vast and vague in the king's imagination," 2 are now
at work in John who has come to life. This inter
pretation of Jesus is what stirred Herod. "John I
beheaded; but who is this about whom I hear such
things?" 3 The "I" is emphatic in the Greek : "As
for John I beheaded him." 4 Herod is here arguing
against accepting the new theory of Jesus that he is
John come to life. He had killed John. There was
no doubt of that. He had too many nightmares on
the subject not to know it. Now he is to have all this
trouble over again! Will John not let him alone?
" He sought to see him," 5 in order to determine if he
were the Baptist or not. He could tell, for he could
never forget that face. It glared at him now. He
kept trying to see Jesus (in perfect tense), but did not
succeed till the trial of Jesus, when Pilate sent the
prisoner to him.6 Herod doubtless felt himself an
injured man about John. His wife was responsible
for his death. As for himself, he had tried, but with
poor success, to forget the murder, but the memory of
it kept coming back to him, "and now the murdered
man himself seemed to have risen again to rebuke
him." 7 To his courtiers8 he finally said : " This is
John the Baptist; he is risen8 from the dead; and
1 Matt. 14 : 2; Mark 6 : 14. Sid rovro ai Bwdueis evepyovaiv ev avrw.
Note that al is almost demonstrative.
2 Bruce, "Matthew," in loco. 8 Luke 9 : 9.
4 Plummer, " Luke," in lOCO. 'ItodvTjV eyii direiceQakiaa.
8 Luke 9 : 9. efTJrei iSelv avrov.
3 Luke 23 : 8. By this time he wants to see Jesus work a miracle and
no longer dreads him as John the Baptist come to life.
7 Plummer, "Matthew," p. 201.
8 toIs iraiaiv awToB. Matt. 14 : 2. Cf. Mark 6 : 14.
' iyrr/eprai. Present perfect, a living reality to Herod's fears.

LINGERING ECHOES 275
therefore do these powers work in him." The idea
became an obsession with him. Herod in this mood
could find no peace at Machserus where he could see
the ghost of John walk. His terror is greatly in
creased by the news about Jesus. John, though
dead, was goading Herod to fury.
2. The Puzzle of the Disciples of Jesus. — The
months go by. Jesus has kept out of the territory of
Herod Antipas as much as possible. It is late sum
mer or early autumn. Christ has his disciples with
him in the region of Csesarea Philippi.1 The greatest
tragedy of the ages is before Jesus. The shadow of
the Cross lies across his path, just a little over six
months ahead. It may be about the time of the feast
of tabernacles as has been suggested by Colonel
Mackinlay in his book, "The Magi" (p. 222). As
the group of Christ's disciples get away from the
gloom of the death of the Baptist, they enter the cloud
and are afraid.2 They are afraid of the cloud on the
Mount of Transfiguration, with its mystery and its
messengers of comfort to Jesus about his decease.
They fear as they hear the voice3 out of the cloud, the
same voice which John the Baptist had heard at the
Jordan : " This is my beloved Son, in whom I am
well pleased; hear ye him." 4 All the synoptics have
"hear ye him." Matthew5 says : "They fell on their
face, and were sore afraid." When Jesus touched
them, they suddenly saw Jesus alone. Moses and
Elijah had gone with the cloud. They go down the
1 Matt. 16 : 13; Mark 8 : 27. 2 Luke 9 : 34. 3 Ibid.
4 Matt. 17 : 5; Mark 9 : 7; Luke 9 : 35. 8 17 : 6.

276 JOHN THE LOYAL
mountain in awe under the strict command of Jesus
not to tell what they had seen till the Son of Man
should rise from the dead. They talked about the
rising from the dead, and then about Elijah. He had
come back, as Malachi had said. They had just seen
and heard him. He did not stay, it is true.1 Besides,
Jesus as the Messiah had come before Elijah. How
can that be? They have evidently forgotten what
Jesus had said about John the Baptist as Elijah.2 It
made little impression on their minds at the time, if
indeed they heard it. They may have been otherwise
occupied at the moment. The puzzle is too great for
these three disciples (Peter, James and John). They
bring it to Jesus : " Why then say the scribes that
Elijah must first come ? " 3 It is the old perplexity
now revived in a new form. "How was Elijah's ap
pearance at the Transfiguration to be reconciled with
the official doctrine of his return ? " 4 The scribes
held from Mal. 3:23; 4 : 4 f . that Elijah himself
would return to earth. The question is certainly sug
gested by the appearance of Elijah at the Mount,
whether the disciples took that to be the predicted
coming and too late for the prophecy in Malachi5 or
whether they were troubled by the fact that the Mes
siah had come while Elijah had not come.6 In either
case John the Baptist is not in the thoughts of the
disciples. It is hard to understand a great contem-
' Plummer (" Matthew," p. 240) takes the question to mean that Elijah
had not yet come.
2 Matt. 11:15. 8 Matt. 17:10. Cf. Mark 9: 11.
4 Swete, " Mark," in loco. 8 So Meyer, Weiss, etc.
8 Broadus, Bruce, etc. The "then" (obv) points back to the Transfig
uration experience. They are puzzled over "first" (wpmrov).

LINGERING ECHOES 277
porary. They were not quite far enough away from
John to take the measure of his stature, though Jesus
had interpreted him for them. The answer of Jesus
is very significant. He is patient with his dull pupils
in spiritual things and repeats his identification of
John with Elijah. The scribes were right in their
interpretation of Malachi (except as to Elijah in per
son, though he does not put in this caveat in words).
" Elijah indeed cometh first, and restoreth all things." 1
This is the prophecy and God's plan about the Fore
runner and the Messiah. Jesus here quotes the Sep
tuagint "restoreth all things," a more general phrase
for the Hebrew2 text : " He shall turn the heart of the
fathers to the children " as in the prediction of Gabriel.3
He was to make ready the people for the Messiah, to
bring to pass a moral renovation. Jesus sadly adds :
" But I say unto you, that Elijah is come already, and
they knew him not, but did unto him whatsoever they
listed." 4 So then Jesus expected no literal coming of
Elijah. John the Baptist was all the Elijah who
would ever come. He passes by the brief visit of the
real Elijah on the Mount. They did not recognize5
John as Elijah nor understand his true mission as
men did not know Jesus in his true light.6 Jesus re
fers to John's death in euphemistic language.7 Mark8
quotes Jesus as saying : " Even as it is written of him."
The fate of Elijah was a type of the death of John.9
1 Mark 9 : 12. 2 Mal. 4:6. ' Luke 1 : 17.
4 Matt. 17 : 12. " owe iireyviaaav. Note eVi.
8 John 1 : 10.
7 imijiaav iv abrif. Literally "did in his case." Cf. Gen. 40 : 14.
8 9 : 13.
9 1 Kings 19 : 2, 10. Cf . Swete, " Mark," in loco.

278 JOHN THE LOYAL
The identification of John with Elijah in spirit and
power is made so plain by Jesus this time that the
disciples saw his meaning clearly. "Then under
stood the disciples that he spake unto them of John
the Baptist."1 "Then" is "at that time," then at
last they understood, but " what a disenchantment :
not the glorified visitant of the night vision, but the
beheaded preacher of the wilderness, the true Elijah." 2
At one blow Jesus has disposed of the notion of the
scribes that Elijah himself was to come and "lead
Israel to the Great Repentance," 3 and the idea of the
disciples that the appearance of Elijah on the moun
tain was the fulfilment of Malachi's prophecy. But
the heart of Jesus is concerned about a more im
portant matter than the interesting parallel between
Elijah and John the Baptist. Elijah and Moses had
been talking with him on the Mount about "his de
cease which he was to accomplish at Jerusalem." 4
He had spoken of his resurrection from the dead just
a little5 before their inquiry about Elijah. The fate
of Elijah will be repeated in that of Jesus. Jesus
asks the disciples how his own death can follow the
restoration by John ? 6 " That he should suffer many
things and be set at naught." 7 There is to be a
suffering Messiah as there has been a suffering Fore
runner.8 The glory of the Transfiguration is followed
by the prophecy of the cross. In truth, the Cross was
the chief theme of converse in the Transfiguration.
1 Matt. 17 : 13. 2 Bruce, "Matthew," in loco.
3 Ibid. Cf. Weber, "Die Lehren des Talm.," S. 337.
4 Luke 9 : 31. 8 Mark 9 : 9; Matt. 17 : 9.
8 Mark 9 : 12. 7 Cf. Matt. 17 : 12.
8 Plummer, "Matthew," p. 240.

LINGERING ECHOES 279
Jesus has no illusions about his own future. He
knows what is ahead of him, and he will meet it
bravely as John did. If Elijah's fate was a prophecy
of John's death, that of John foretells the doom of
Jesus. The disciples had been puzzled about the
resurrection from the dead and then about the coming
of Elijah. The problem of Elijah is cleared for them,
but they are still unable to understand the words of
Jesus about his own death.
The Rev. F. B. Meyer1 has drawn a very helpful
parallel between the life of Elijah and that of John the
Baptist which may be useful to modern disciples who
are puzzled over the matter. I give it here in con
densed form. They were similar in their dress. Each
of them lived awhile in Gilead (Perea). Each was ab
stemious in his diet (Elijah was fed by ravens, John
lived on locusts and wild honey). They were both
persecuted by a wicked king and queen (Ahab and
Jezebel, Herod and Herodias). Each had a distinct
sense of the presence of God. Elijah said to Ahab :
"As the Lord, the God of Israel, liveth, before whom
I stand." John said: "The kingdom of heaven is
at hand." They both had a "God-consciousness."
Each had moments of depression (Elijah under the
juniper-tree, John in prison). They both hold a re
lation to fire (Elijah called down fire from heaven to
consume the wood drenched with water in the test
on Carmel; John prophesied the baptism of fire by
the Messiah). Each turned the people back to God
(Elijah made the people cry, "Jehovah, he is God";
i "John the Baptist," 1910, pp. 239-245.

280 JOHN THE LOYAL
John turned the hearts of the fathers to the children
and to God). Each had also a gentler ministry
(Elijah anointed Elisha, John baptized Jesus). Each
had a sudden end (Elijah caught up in the chariot of
fire, John suddenly beheaded). Some of these points
are more striking than others, but they illustrate well
the prophecy of Malachi about the return of Elijah
and the fulfilment in the career of John as interpreted
by Jesus himself.
3. The Power of the Silent Voice. — John dead was,
for a time at least, more powerful than when alive.
He was now a martyr and a hero with the masses who
had heard his wondrous message and had received
baptism from him. Jesus had said to the three dis
ciples that, as John had suffered martyrdom, so would
he. On the great Tuesday in Passion Week, the
Tuesday of the Debate, Jesus taught for the last time
in the Temple. The power of Christ over the masses
was never so great. The Triumphal Entry had filled
the Galilean multitudes at the Passover with wild
enthusiasm. The Jewish rulers sought to kill Jesus,
" for they feared him." J Jesus had done what John
had never attempted. He had come right into the
Temple itself and won the favor of the masses away
from the accredited teachers of the law. This was a
triumph that was unendurable to Pharisees and Sad
ducees, but " they could not find what they might do.
for all the people hung upon him listening." 2 The
rulers finally decided upon a formal challenge of the
authority of Jesus. Mark and Luke3 mention that
1 Mark 11 : 18. 2 Luke 19 : 48. 3 Mark 11 : 27; Luke 20 : 1.

LINGERING ECHOES 281
"the chief priests, and the scribes, and the elders"
(the Sanhedrin, in a word, which was composed of
these three classes) came to Jesus and said : " Tell us :
By what authority doest thou these things ? or who is
he that gave thee this authority?" J The object was
to entrap Jesus and to break his hold upon the people.
The crowds in the Temple were even now hanging on
his teaching and preaching.2 A dilemma was pre
sented to Jesus by this challenge. If he claimed to be
the Messiah and to have direct authority from God,
they would interpret this to be treason against Csesar
by giving a political turn to his claim to be king and to
have a kingdom. They finally used this very argu
ment with Pilate3 to force his acquiescence in the
death of Jesus. The other horn of the dilemma was
the favor of the people. If Jesus denied that he was
the Messiah or asserted only human authority like
other teachers, the spell of the Triumphal Entry
would be broken. The rulers felt sure that they
would ruin Jesus with the masses or get him into
trouble with Rome. It is the mission of John the
Baptist that gives Jesus the way out of the dilemma.
He meets the dilemma of the rulers with another and
one pertinent to their query. It was not a dodge on
the part of Christ to evade a categorical answer.
They had asked Jesus "who" gave him his authority.
This "who" has two aspects, the divine origin or
source and the human agent who conveyed it. The
claim of Jesus to divine authority will be scouted
by them without human endorsement, prophetic ap-
> Luke 20 : 2. 2 Luke 20 : 1. * John 19 : 12.

282 JOHN THE LOYAL
proval by an accredited spokesman of God. So
Jesus properly takes up first the divine endorsement
through a prophetic agent. That had come through
John the Baptist as all men knew. John had made
no secret of his identification of Jesus as the Messiah.
But who was John? The rulers had once1 investi
gated John and had refused to deny his claim to be
the Forerunner of the Messiah. They did not en
dorse John formally, though "ye were willing to re
joice for a season in his light." 2 They were afraid to
condemn John. It was the business of the Sanhedrin
to pass on John's claims3 to be a prophet, not to say
Forerunner of the Messiah. They had not done so,
and were therefore not in a position to challenge Jesus
who was formally and publicly endorsed by John.
Was John a prophet of God ? "I also will ask you a
question; and tell me : The baptism of John, was it
from heaven, or from men?" 4 Just "one" question
Matthew and Mark have it. The rulers said "Tell
us" to Jesus; he says "Tell me" to them. The
"baptism" of John is not singled out by Jesus for any
ecclesiastical or sacramental reasons, but simply be
cause the baptism of repentance stood for the whole
work of John.5 It was the objective symbol. If the
rulers will take up a position on the ministry of John,
that will clear the way for Jesus to make an intelligible
reply to their query. If John was a prophet, then
Jesus had prophetic endorsement such as the Messiah
1 John 1 : 19 ft. 2 John 5 : 35.
8 Plummer, "Matthew," p. 293.
4 Luke 20 : 3 f. Cf. Matt. 21 : 24 f.; Mark 11 : 29 f.
8 Cf . Swete on Mark, Bruce on Matthew, Plummer on Matthew, Broadus
on Matthew.

LINGERING ECHOES 283
should have. He had just the kind of authority that
ought to have weight with the religious leaders of
God's people. The rulers ought to have taken a public
stand on John's career long before this.1 They
were squarely and fairly caught. No wonder "they
reasoned with themselves." 2 There was no time for
prolonged conference. The pause was embarrassing.
The people noticed their difficulty and were on the
alert to see if the rulers would say an unkind word
about the martyred prophet. The rulers knew that
they were caught, hopelessly caught in the meshes of
their own net. The reasoning seems to have been
aloud; perhaps they were excited and spoke louder
than they knew in their conference. As a matter of
fact, John's work was both from heaven and from
men.3 He was not divine as Jesus, but his authority
came from God, not from the ecclesiastics. But the
rulers would not dare deny that John's baptism was
both divine and human. They confess their defeat
to themselves in the most naive manner as reported
by Matthew:4 "If we shall say, From heaven; he
will say unto us, Why then did ye not believe him ? "
They knew the power of Jesus in debate too well to
risk that retort. " But if we shall say, From men; we
fear the multitude; for all hold John as a prophet."
In Mark5 there is an anacoluthon " — they feared the
people." Luke6 adds : "All the people will stone us."
They are in a cul-de-sac, and meekly come back and
1 Hummer, " Matthew," p. 293.
2 Siekoyifrvro Trap' iavrois. Matt. 21 : 25. Note imperfect tense, rrapd
suggests a conference a little aside. Mark (11 : 31) has Trpdi.
3 Bruce, " Matthew," in loco.
i 21 : 25 f. « 11 : 32. • 20 : 6.

284 JOHN THE LOYAL
say : " We know not." x Their rout is complete.
"They had publicly declared that they were unable
to settle such questions, thus abdicating their authority
in religious questions of the highest moment, and they
do not venture to press him further." 2 John was dead,
but he wielded a sceptre over the hearts of the Jewish
masses. The Pharisees and Sadducees had quailed
before John as he denounced them to their faces.
They shrink now before the power of that silent
voice. They know that a storm3 of hate will burst
upon them. They actually fear stoning in such case.
No words can add anything to this grip which John
has on the hearts of the people as the rulers come into
collision with Jesus. Herod feared John's ghost.
The Pharisees and Sadducees fear John's upright
character and hold upon the love of all the people.
Jesus had probed to the root of the unbelief of the
rulers, and they winced at his home thrust.4 But
Jesus is not done with the problem of John the Bap
tist. He drove home the lesson of their admission
about John by the parable of the two sons. One said
he would and did not, like them. Another said he
would not and did, like the publicans and harlots who
repented at John's preaching and at that of Jesus.
These " go into the kingdom of God before you. For
John came unto you in the way of righteousness, and
ye believed him not : but the publicans and the harlots
believed him : and ye, when ye saw it, did not even
repent yourselves afterward, that ye might believe
1 Matt. 21 : 27; Mark 11 : 33; Luke 20 : 7.
2 Plummer, "Matthew," p. 293. 3 Swete, "Mark," in loco.
4 Smith, " Days of His Flesh," p. 308.

LINGERING ECHOES 285
him." J It was a terrible turn in the argument.
They had not escaped Christ's dilemma. He boldly
charged them with not believing John when they saw
that he was a prophet. This was one horn that they
had tried to escape,2 but Jesus now pillories them on
it. They had escaped stoning from the crowd, but
not the exposure from Jesus. The ministry of John
thus plays an important part in the closing day of
Christ's own public work. We sigh
"But oh, for the touch of a vanish'd hand,
And the sound of a voice that is still."
But John's hand wields a sceptre and John's voice
still rings in the ears of men, calling them to righteous
ness, pointing out Jesus as the Lamb of God.
4. The New Epoch in History. — We pass on beyond
the great event whose shortening shadow was coming
upon Christ. The fate of John did meet Jesus. The
manner of his death was different, but he was killed
as the great martyr to truth and righteousness. Like
John, Jesus was cut down in his prime. The forms
of a trial were gone through with in the case of Jesus,
but only the forms were observed, and by no means
all of them were kept. As with John, so with Jesus,
hate, jealousy, intrigue on the part of the ecclesiastics
compassed his death. There was not toward Jesus
the personal resentment of a tigress like Herodias.
But the political rulers were used against him, and
Jesus himself appeared before Herod Antipas,3 who
now assumed an air of careless curiosity about Jesus.
1 Matt. 21 : 32. 2 Matt. 21 : 25. 8 Luke 26 : 6-12.

286 JOHN THE LOYAL
He had gotten over his fright about John's having
returned to life. He actually "mocked" l Jesus now
that he is a prisoner. He is very brave before the
defenceless. But in Acts2 we are beyond the tragedy.
Jesus has risen from the grave and has returned to
his place at the right hand of the Father. It is Peter
who interprets the present situation to the disciples of
Jesus. They have passed through the most wonder
ful experience that had ever fallen to the lot of men.
They must now apprehend the significance of it all.
They must face the world with courage. They pos
sess the great facts of the spiritual revolution that has
begun. Peter says : " Beginning from the baptism
of John, unto the day that he was received up from
us, of these must one become a witness with us of his
resurrection." Our purpose is not here to discuss the
address of Peter about the selection of a successor to
Judas. Our concern is with the single point of the
reference to the baptism of John as the new epoch in
human history. The baptism is again mentioned as
the thing which signalized the ministry of John.
They can now look back over the ministry of both
Jesus and John. They go together in the large view.
John's was first and introduced the new age. The
disciples are now no longer puzzled over Elijah that
was to come. The manner of Peter's reference to
John shows clearly that they now accept the inter
pretation of Jesus as a matter of course. It is not from
the close of John's ministry that Peter dates the new
dispensation, but the beginning. When John lifted
1 «pirai$as. 2 1 : 22.

LINGERING ECHOES 287
up his voice in the wilderness, that was the opening of
the new dispensation. It is interesting to note that
Mark begins his gospel with the baptism of John. It
is commonly supposed that Mark was the interpreter,
if not amanuensis, of Peter. There is another allu
sion to John's baptism by Peter in the same epochal
way, "beginning from Galilee, after the baptism
which John preached." l This mention again re
minds us of the Gospel of Mark which, after the bap
tism of John, takes us at once to the Galilean ministry
of Jesus. "The law and the prophets were until
John." 2 It is a great thing to mark a new time.
That John did. Human history will never again be
what it was before John was able to say : " Behold,
the Lamb of God that taketh away the sin of the
world." s Peter's speeches show that the disciples
soon began to take the right measure of John and of
his proper relation to Jesus. He has never lost that
place in the estimation of the world and never will.
Whether Jesus referred to him as the porter4 or not,
he did open the door and usher in the Good Shepherd
of the sheep. That was honor enough for John, to
be the Doorkeeper for Jesus.
5. Impression on Paul. — It is Luke in Acts who
reports the addresses of Paul. But we are not justi
fied in saying that Luke made up Paul's speeches
after the fashion of Thucydides. The speeches of
Peter, Stephen, Paul differ in style, and each of Paul's
addresses has a special appropriateness to time and
1 Acts 10 : 37. 2 Luke 16 : 16. 3 John 1 : 29.
4 John 10 : 4.

288 JOHN THE LOYAL
place.1 Paul had spent much time in Jerusalem
while a Pharisaic student and leader, and could very
well have heard the current reports of John the Bap
tist and his sayings. His words had left a deep mark
on his age. Among the Christians they would in par
ticular be cherished because of John's testimony to
Jesus as the Messiah. In the first extended report of
one of Paul's discourses he makes express mention2
of the Baptist. "Of this man's seed hath God ac
cording to promise brought unto Israel a Saviour,
Jesus; when John had first preached before his com
ing the baptism of repentance to all the people of
Israel. And as John was fulfilling his course, he
said, What suppose ye I am? I am not he. But
behold, there cometh one after me the shoes of whose
feet I am not worthy to unloose." Paul is speaking
in the Jewish synagogue at Antioch in Iconium to
both Jews and Gentiles. His reference to John is
brief, but clear and full enough for his point. He is
proving that the promise made to David was fulfilled
in Jesus, John the Baptist being witness. John did
not consider himself to be the Messiah, but he knew
who was the Messiah. The words of John are not
quoted exactly in the form in which they occur in the
Synoptic Gospels,3 but more nearly resemble the form
in Luke. The essential point is the same in all four
reports. John himself repeated it in a still different
way.4 But with Paul, as with Peter, John is the man
who introduced the new age. He first preached the
1 Cf. M. Jones, "St. Paul the Orator," 1910. 8 Acts 13 : 23 ff.
3 Matt. 3 : 11; Mark 1 : 7; Luke 3 : 16. 4 John 1 : 26 f.

LINGERING ECHOES 289
baptism of repentance and it was just before the com
ing of Jesus. John was filling out his course1 when
he spoke the words quoted. It was not long before
his imprisonment. Paul thus reveals considerable
knowledge of the life and teaching of the Baptist. He
understands his priority to Jesus, his preaching about
repentance, his baptism, his disclaimer about being
the Messiah, his knowledge that the Messiah was
near, the cutting off of the Baptist's career. He prob
ably knew much more, but these facts suited his pur
pose on this occasion. That Paul did know about
John's message is shown by another brief exposition
of his teaching made by Paul on a later occasion.
Paul is in Ephesus, and has to explain John's real
views to some ill-taught disciples of John. Paul said :
" John baptized with the baptism of repentance, say
ing unto the people, that they should believe on him
who should come after him, that is, on Jesus." 2 John
often spoke of "the Coming One," and Paul is sure
that he meant Jesus.2 The baptism of John marked
by repentance continues the chief characteristic of his
ministry. That was the point that appealed most to
the imagination of men and that gave him his name of
the Baptizer, but the heart of John's ministry was his
testimony to Jesus as the Messiah. This he came to
feel himself.3 Paul sees it also in this passage. Here,
then, we have the great apostle after Christ joining
hands with the great prophet before Christ in full ac
cord. They both accept Jesus as the Messiah — the
1 eirAijpov To* Spopuov. Cf. Paul's language in Acts 20 : 24; II Tim. 4 : 7.
2 Acts 19 : 4. ' John 1 : 34.

290 JOHN THE LOYAL
hope of Israel. John was the clasp between the old
dispensation and the new. Jesus is the common
bond between John the man of the wilderness and
Paul the man of the schools. There is fellowship in
Christ between men of every age, race and condition.
Paul is glad to honor John as the Forerunner of Jesus.
6. A Great Disciple of John. — What became of the
disciples of John after his death? He organized no
apostolate as did Jesus, though he had disciples who
accompanied him and were loyal to him, some even
to the point of jealousy of Jesus, as we have seen.
There was a circle of disciples who clung close to
John during his imprisonment and buried his corpse.1
The great bulk of John's disciples naturally blended
with the followers of Jesus. After the death of John
his disciples went and told Jesus. In Palestine espe
cially this union took place more easily. But the in
fluence of John extended far beyond Palestine. Over
twenty years after John's death there are proofs of
his abiding power in Alexandria and in Ephesus.
The attitude of these belated disciples of John toward
Jesus will depend on the amount of information which
they possess of the teaching of John. If they have
the later as well as the earlier words of John, his identi
fication of Jesus as the Messiah as well as his prophecy
of the Messiah, they will either be already disciples of
Jesus or predisposed to that step. There would nat
urally be varieties among the lingering disciples of
John. Some would be ignorant of Jesus, some would
be ignorant of John's real position. Some would know
• Matt. 4 : 12; 9 : 14; 11 : 2 f.; Mark 6 : 29.

LINGERING ECHOES 291
well John's teaching and that of Jesus and not be
familiar with the later developments since Pentecost.
We have seen that John the Baptist made his impress
on Peter and Paul. But he made a deeper mark on
Apoilos, of Alexandria, one of the most learned or
eloquent1 men of the first century. He was a Jew
who was " mighty in the Scriptures," 2 evidently, like
Paul, a man of the schools. He was a man of prowess
as an interpreter and speaker before he comes to
Ephesus. In Alexandria he was in touch with the
Jewish teaching and the Greek philosophy, and prob
ably knew the combination of the two in Philo the
Jew. There is no real evidence for attributing to
him the authorship of the "Wisdom of Solomon."
He is held by some to be the writer of the Epistle to
the Hebrews. When he went later to Corinth, he so
"powerfully confuted the Jews, and that publicly,
showing by the scriptures that Jesus was the Christ," 3
that he at once divided honors in that church, and was
the occasion, though through no fault of his, of a
schism in the church there.4 It is significant that this
man of learning, native gifts and force of character
is a representative of the " baptism of John," " know
ing only" that when he appears before us.5 But we
are not at liberty to interpret this language to mean
that Apollos knew nothing of Jesus and was not a
disciple of Jesus. The correct6 text here expressly
states that Apollos "spake and taught accurately the
1 dvTip Aoyios. The word is ambiguous. Acts 18 : 24.
2 BvvaTos Siv iv Tats ypafyaZs,
3 Acts 18 : 28. 4 1 Cor. 3:4; 16 : 12. 6 Acts 18 : 25.
8 NABDEL. ikdkei <tal iSlSaanev aKpip*u; Ta irepi toO 'Iijo-ov. Note im
perfect tense.

292 JOHN THE LOYAL
things concerning Jesus." He was an experienced
teacher of the story of Jesus, and he did it accurately.
He made no mistakes as far as he went. He was fer
vent in spirit and "instructed in the way of the Lord."
How much did he know ? Rendall x groups these
facts clearly. "He had (a) received the baptism of
John, (b) been instructed in the way of the Lord,
and he (c) knew the things concerning Jesus. This
represents the stage reached either by those who them
selves had been disciples of Jesus, or brought very
near to him, but had returned to a distant home be
fore Pentecost or for some other reason had not main
tained communications with the apostolic church; or
by those who had been instructed by such disciples."
In other words, Apollos seems to occupy the stand
point of those disciples of John who accepted Jesus as
the Messiah, but who knew nothing of Pentecost and
the developments since. What did Apollos lack?
" But when Priscilla and Aquila heard him, they took
him unto them, and expounded unto him the way of
God more accurately." 2 They took him to them
selves3 and set forth more fully4 the way of God which
he already knew. There was no correction of what
he did know, but rather addition to his stock of knowl
edge. We are left partly to conjecture as to what the
new teaching was. There is no evidence that Apollos
was baptized anew. The case of the twelve disciples
in Acts 19 is not necessarily similar.5 These disciples
1 "The Acts of the Apostles," p. 341. 2 Acts 18 : 26.
3 Trpoo-eXdBovTo. Middle voice. 4 i$ edetro. Middle voice also.
6 Knowling (Acts in "Expositor's Greek Testament") argues from
Acts 19 : 5 that Apollos was also baptized. But Meyer (in loco) does not
think so, nor does Hackett (in loco) consider it probable.

LINGERING ECHOES 293
were poorly taught in John's own message, while
Apollos was accurately instructed. It cannot be
maintained that the disciples of John were all rebap-
tized, that the baptism of John was not "valid" with
the early disciples of Jesus. That is all the baptism pos
sessed by Jesus and the first half-dozen of his apostles,
so far as we have any record. The trouble with Apol
los was not in his baptism. The mention of John's
baptism was for the purpose of dating him, so to speak.
He occupied the pre-Pentecost stand-point. There is
no hint that Priscilla and Aquila taught Apollos the
insufficiency of John's baptism. Blass1 suggests that
Apollos may have had the Gospel of Mark or one of
the early accounts of the life of Jesus which stopped
short of Pentecost. Mark's Gospel begins with John's
baptism and ends with the resurrection and appear
ance of Christ. If Apollos knew all that was in
Mark's Gospel, he would still have much to learn by
way of understanding the things of Christ. Mark's
Gospel gives the primitive narrative of the ministry
and death of Jesus, and probably covers the extent of
the knowledge of Apollos when he appears in Ephesus.
The word " instructed" 2 usually refers to oral teaching,
but not always. He is a well-equipped expounder of
the scriptures and of the work of Jesus, but he appar
ently is ignorant of the baptism of the Holy Spirit as a
fact.3 John had described the Messianic work under
that figure, suggested by his own baptism. Perhaps
Luke notes here that Apollos knew only the baptism
1 " Acta Apostolorum," in loco. 2 KaTijxweVos. Cf. Luke 1 : 4.
8 Rendall, " Acts of the Apostles," p. 442.

294 JOHN THE LOYAL
of John because he did not know the baptism of
the Holy Spirit, which John had said the Messiah
would bestow.1 Priscilla and Aquila could explain
how that prophecy of John was fulfilled so wondrously
on the Day of Pentecost.2 Jesus had, indeed, him
self breathed the Holy Spirit upon the disciples after
his death and resurrection.3 But that was only an
earnest of the fuller blessing which he had promised
and for which he bade the disciples to wait.4 There
is, in truth, some hint that Apollos received this bap
tism of the Holy Spirit after (or during) his visit with
Priscilla and Aquila (two saints of rare sympathy and
wisdom, who knew how to perform a delicate task).
The hint lies in the tremendous power5 of his work in
Corinth, whither he went. But, all in all, Apollos
stands only to the credit of John's work. He had
grasped the vital elements in the work of both John
and Jesus, and was ready to learn more of the signif
icance of the life of Jesus under the tutelage of the
Holy Spirit. The baptism of John stood for nothing
unless there was first the new heart. It was the pledge
of the new life in Christ which could only be entered
into with fulness under the leading of the Holy Spirit.
Apollos was going straight ahead in line with John's
own teaching when he was taught more accurately the
way of God.
7. Misguided Disciples. — Apollos is gone to Corinth
and Paul comes to Ephesus on the third great mis-
1 Matt. 3:11; Mark 1:8; Luke 3 : 16; Acts 18 : 25.
2 Acts 2 and 3. 8 John 2Q : 22.
4 John 15 : 26-16 : 16; Luke 24 : 49; Acts 1 : 3-8.
8 Acts 18 : 28.

LINGERING ECHOES 295
sionary tour.1 Paul "found certain disciples"2 in
Ephesus. The expression is very vague and raises
a number of problems. How did these "disciples"
escape3 the notice of Apollos ? As a matter of fact,
there is no evidence that they had come to Ephesus
before Apollos left. The words of Luke in Acts quite
well admit of this interpretation.4 If this is true,
there is no problem concerning their connection with
Apollos. But, even if Apollos did not leave till after
the arrival of these " twelve," 5 there is still no proof
that Apollos saw them or had any dealings with them.6
In favor of the idea that Apollos was quite indepen
dent of these twelve men is the fact that Priscilla and
Aquila apparently take no interest in them.7 Apollos
would surely have sought to impart to these men the
fuller light which he had learned from Priscilla and
Aquila, if they were disciples of his. Even if Apollos
had been suddenly called to Corinth, which does not
seem to be the case in view of the careful preparation
for going by way of a letter of introduction,8 he would
almost certainly have urged 9 Priscilla and Aquila to
lead them into the fuller light. It is Paul who dis
covers this group of " disciples " and seeks to indoctri
nate them. His method is quite different from that
of Priscilla and Aquila with Apollos. The difference
hardly lies wholly in Paul's temperament. The cases
1 Acts 19 : 1. 2 ebptbv rivosi pLaaiyrds.
' Ramsay, " St. Paul the Traveller," p. 270; Felten, " Apostelgeschichte,"
S. 351.
4 Knowling, "Acts," in loco.
8 Acts 19 : 7. oi rims avSpet iiaei StiBexa. The number was, of course,
accidental. It was not another circle of twelve like the twelve apostles.
8 Rendall, " Acts," in loco.
1 1bid. 8 Acts 18 : 27. ' Rendall, " Acts," in loco.

296 JOHN THE LOYAL
called for different treatment. The whole tone of the
narrative in Acts 19 : 1-7 is that of a separate incident
with no actual connection with the work of Apollos in
ch. 18. The one note of similarity is the fact that they,
like Apollos, have only the baptism of John.1 But we
must not be misled by a phrase. The context is en
tirely different in the two incidents. The facts about
Apollos have already been set forth. What are the
facts about these twelve " disciples " ? Can we get a
clear idea of them? They were undoubtedly dis
ciples of John.2 Were they also disciples of Jesus?
McGiffert3 says that they were not. This has been
the common notion from the time of Chrysostom,4
and some writers even hold that these men were bap
tized by John the Baptist himself.5 But Blass6 con
tends that the use of the term "disciples" and "be
lieved" proves that they were also disciples of Jesus.
That is, of course, possible, though the word "be
lieved " 7 occurs in Paul's question and cannot be
pressed into a positive assertion about them. There
is more force in the word " disciples," but it must not
be overlooked that the term was applied in the gospels
freely to the followers of the Baptist.8 The story in
the Acts is naturally from the stand-point of disciples of
Jesus, however, and the most obvious meaning of the
word here is that these men were in some sort disciples
of Jesus. But even so, it does not follow that they
1 Acts 19 : 3. 2 Ibid. ' " Apostolic Age," p. 286.
4 " Acts," in loco.
6 Knowling, " Acts," in loco.
8 " Acta Apostolorum," in loco.
'' Acts 19 : 2. niarevaavres.
8 Mark 2: 18; 6:29; Matt. 9 : 14; 11:2; Luke 5: 33; 7:18f.; 11:1;
John 1 : 35, 37; 3 : 25; 4 ; 1.

LINGERING ECHOES 297
were on the same plane with Apollos, who taught
accurately or carefully the things concerning Jesus,
though he knew only the baptism of John.1 It is not
certain that these men knew accurately the things of
John or of Jesus. We do not have to assume that
they took John to be the Messiah. That error arose
in John's own time and, in spite of his resolute dis
claimer, did not disappear at once.2 Neander3 sup
poses that the Zabians (Mendseans or Nazoreans),
discovered in the East in the seventeenth century, are
a remnant of this sect who clung to John as the Mes
siah instead of Jesus. A sect of Hemerobaptists
claim John the Baptist as one of their number. They
appear in the second century in proconsular Asia.4
These Hemerobaptists have perverted John's teaching
and misrepresented his office.5 They baptize daily
for atonement of sin and for sanctification.6 Baptism
is no longer a single symbolic ordinance. John is
himself the Messiah with these people. It needs no
argument to prove that they owe nothing in reality to
John. They have seized on his name and misused it.7
There is little likelihood (none, I think) that the twelve
disciples at Ephesus were tainted with this heresy.
If they are Christians, they are certainly very imper
fectly informed 8 disciples of Jesus, far below the level
• Acts 18 : 25. 2 Hackett, " Acts," in loco.
8 "Church History," vol. I, p. 376.
4 Justin Martyr, "Dialogue with Trypho," Clem. Horn, ii, 23; Hege-
sippus in Eus. H. E. IV, 22. Cf. Lambert in " Hastings's D. C. G."
8 Lightfoot, " Colossians," p. 401.
8 " Apost Const.," vi, 6.
7 Justin Martyr even (" Dialogue with Trypho," 10) alludes to them as
" Baptists," but they have no real connection with Christianity, certainly
not with the great body of Christians now called Baptists.
8 Lightfoot, " Colossians," p. 400.

298 JOHN THE LOYAL
of Apollos. But they betray a lamentable ignorance
of important elements in the teaching of John, to such
an extent that one hesitates to call them Christians at
all. It could have been true only in a nominal sense,
or at most "they possessed the elements of a true
faith, and acknowledged the name of Christ as soon
as the apostle made it known to them." 1 They did
not know that the Holy Spirit had been bestowed, if,
indeed, they knew of the existence of the Holy Spirit.
Paul's question2 was whether they had received the
gi't of the Holy Spirit when they believed. The in
quiry seems abrupt because we probably do not have
all the conversation.3 Paul assumes that they are
familiar with the promise of the Holy Spirit to all
who call upon the name of the Lord.4 This fact may
argue that he had not had much discussion with them
and did not know the depth of their ignorance. They
answered : " Nay, we did not so much as hear whether
the Holy Spirit was." 5 The Revised Version adds
"given" to the word "was." But it is by no means
clear that that is the idea here as in John 7 : 39.
Knowling6 urges that these disciples knew of the
existence of the Holy Spirit because of John's teach
ing and the Old Testament also. But the trouble is
that these "disciples" may have been ignorant of
John's portrayal of the Messiah. Still, it is charitable
to them to interpret the language as referring to the
bestowal of the Holy Spirit. Paul expresses astonish-
• Hackett, " Acts," in loco.
2 Acts 19 : 2. The two aorists refer to the one event, et web/ia Syiov
eAafiere riaTevaavrei ;
8 Hackett, " Acts," in loco. 4 Acts 2 : 39.
8 *A.kk* obSi ei irpeCua aytof co-tic >) Kov'aapwv. 6 " Acts," in loco.

LINGERING ECHOES 299
ment at their ignorance and inquires for the signifi
cance of their baptism. "Unto what then were ye
baptized?"1 To Paul's mind a baptism in water
that had no symbolic relation to the Holy Spirit's
work was an absurdity whether they had received the
baptism of the Holy Spirit or not. These disciples
reply simply : " Unto John's baptism." 2 They had
received John's baptism, that and no more. How did
Paul understand this reply ? Paul said : " John bap
tized with the baptism of repentance, saying unto the
people that they should believe on him that should
come after him, that is, on Jesus." 3 Did Paul mean
to say that John's baptism was inadequate and there
fore they must receive a new water baptism? So
Knowling4 : " John's own words showed that his bap
tism was insufficient." Insufficient for what? John
said that the baptism of the Holy Spirit at the hands
of the Messiah was more important than his water
baptism.5 But that was a very different thing from
saying that those who had received water baptism
from John should receive another water baptism from
Jesus or his disciples. As a matter of fact, till now,
we have no instance of such a repetition of water bap
tism in the New Testament. Rendall6 gets rid of
the difficulty by saying that John's baptism " was only
a preparation for, as also a profession of faith in, the
coming Messiah, whose baptism was to be with water
1 Acts 19 : 3. eis ri olv ipairria&rire; the use of eis does not demand
"into" in English. Cf. Matt. 10 : 41; 12 : 41. Paul means to ask for the
higher meaning of the ordinance to them.
2 eis to 'ladvov fid-nTiap-a.
0 Acts 19 : 4. 'liadmys ipdmae pdirTiaaa ueravoias, Tip ka$ keyiov, eis TOV
ipxbp-evov pier avrbviva riarevaiaai, rovreariv eis rbv 'lijaovv.
i " Acts," in loco. 'Matt. 3:11. • "Acts," p. 246.

300 JOHN THE LOYAL
and the Spirit." But he here adds "water" to the
words of the Baptist. That argument required the
rebaptism of all the Johannine disciples, the six apos
tles of Jesus included. Hackett1 comes much nearer
to the heart of the matter when he says : " John indeed
preached repentance and a Saviour to come (as you
know); but the Messiah whom he announced has
appeared in Jesus, and you are now to believe on him
as John directed." This interpretation assumes that
they had not exercised faith in Jesus. Paul probably
meant even more than this. John's water baptism
was preceded by repentance, which was a spiritual act
under the influence of the Holy Spirit. Thus Paul
means to say, that, if they really understood the sig
nificance of John's baptism, they should have known
of the baptism of the Spirit of which he had first asked
them, since John preached about that great character
istic of the new dispensation. Paul is, then, not dis
crediting John's baptism, but interpreting the real
significance of John's baptism, and exposing their
defective comprehension of John's baptism, which
they claimed to have received. The rest of Paul's
explanation is in harmony with this idea. John urged
belief in the Coming One at the same time that he
spoke of the baptism of the Holy Spirit.2 These
"disciples" were evidently very backward in their
knowledge of John's earlier preaching. In his later
ministry John even identified the Coming One with
Jesus : "This is he of whom I said." 3 So then Paul
is justified in adding "that is, on Jesus." In effect,
1 " Acts," p. 219. 2 Matt. 3:11. 8 John 1:30.

LINGERING ECHOES 301
therefore, Paul has administered to them a rebuke for
their ignorance of John's teaching. They had, in
fact, received the form of John's baptism without any
conception of its spiritual import. It would appear
from Luke's narrative that Paul's exposition of John's
teaching came as a fresh ray of light to them. They
illustrate how John's work, which accented with tre
mendous power the reality of spiritual experience,
had become hazy at this distance in the minds of a
group of well-meaning men. John's new ordinance
was called a repentance-baptism to distinguish it from
the mere ceremonial ablutions of the Pharisees. But
here at last "John's baptism of repentance" has
dwindled into just "John's baptism" and the addi
tion of "repentance" by Paul comes as a brand-new
idea to these followers of the Baptist. "When they
heard this, they were baptized in the name of the
Lord Jesus." J Paul's brief exposition set the whole
matter in such a new light that they felt that they had
not been baptized at all. They are baptized afresh,
not because they had only John's baptism, but be
cause they did not really have that. The original
question of Paul about the baptism of the Holy Spirit
has for the moment receded into the background.
These men did not even have a real water baptism,
let alone the spirit baptism. So they are baptized in
the name of the Lord Jesus, probably as representing
that of the Trinity.2 It is surely gratuitous to insist
on the addition in "Codex Bezse" "for the forgive
ness of sins"3 and to explain it as showing "that
1 Acts 19 : 5. ! Cf . Matt. 28 : 19. • eis aipeo-n> duapnibv D.

302 JOHN THE LOYAL
John's baptism did not convey forgiveness; hence the
repetition of the baptism of water." x It is obviously
just a repetition of the language of Mark 1 : 4 about
the baptism of John. In point of fact neither the
water baptism of John nor that in the name of Jesus
"conveyed" forgiveness of sins. In each instance the
baptism in water presumed that the forgiveness had al
ready been received. Now it is that " when Paul had
laid his hands upon them, the Holy Spirit came on
them; and they spake with tongues and prophesied." 2
The water baptism was not a prerequisite to the bap
tism of the Spirit. In the case of Cornelius and his
household the baptism of the Spirit preceded the
water baptism.3 The same order was true of Paul's
Spirit baptism and water baptism.4 But the discus
sion between Paul and these twelve disciples led back
from the baptism of the Spirit to the water baptism of
John. They had not really received the water bap
tism. This defect was remedied on their confession
and request apparently. Then came the baptism of
the Holy Spirit of which Paul had first inquired. The
proof was at hand, for they spake with tongues and
prophesied as at Pentecost and at Csesarea. The
bestowal of the Holy Spirit preceded the speaking with
tongues and was independent of it, nor was this proof
always on hand. It was a great experience for these
twelve men. They had come a long way during their
interview with Paul. They had farther to come than
Apollos. Paul had laid hold of their loyalty to John
' Rendall, " Acts," p. 346.
2 Acts 19 : 6. 8 Acts 10 : 44-48. 4 Acts 9 : 17 f.

LINGERING ECHOES 303
to bring them out into the full truth as set forth by
John and Jesus.
8. The Last Look at John. — Many years go by.
Paul and Peter have joined the roll of martyrs headed
by John and Jesus, Stephen and James. John the
Apostie lingers on till the end of the century. It is
possible that the principles of the Hemerobaptists
spread in Asia Minor. At Ephesus John the Apostle
probably lived to see the name of John the Baptist
bandied about as a party shibboleth. These heretics
tried to appropriate John the Baptist. "His name is
no longer the sign of imperfect appreciation [as in the
case of the twelve at Ephesus], but the watchword of
direct antagonism; John has been set up as a rival to
Jesus." * So then in this Fourth Gospel, written at
the end of the first century, we see John the Apostle
interpreting John the Baptist and Forerunner in the
light of the misuse of his name by the Hemerobaptists.
He calls him simply "John." To the aged Apostle
he was the John. He had himself been John's disciple,
and it was at John's instance that he went that day to
follow Jesus.2 He cannot bear to see that glorious
name become a by-word among these narrow opposers
of Jesus. To us John's great disciple is the John.3
John the Apostle loved both John and Jesus. He
knew that these heretics were wrong. He knew that
John was not jealous of Jesus, but placed the crown
on his head as the Lamb of God and the Bridegroom
whose friend he was.4 John was great, but Jesus was
1 Lightfoot, "Colossians," p. 401. 2 John 1 : 35-42.
8 Dods, " John," in loco. 4 John 1 : 29 ; 3 : 28 f .

304 JOHN THE LOYAL
greater, as John himself knew and gladly acknowl
edged. John was the lamp (a bright and shining one),
but Jesus was the sun.1 "He was not the light, but
came that he might bear witness of the light." 2
Nothing could give John greater offence, if he only
knew, than for people to set him up as the rival of
Jesus. "He must increase, but I must decrease."
As the Apostle looks back across two generations since
he first heard the wonderful words of John by the
Jordan, he can see in a clear light the relation between
John and Jesus. Jesus is the eternal Logos, the Son
with the Father, the Life and the Light of men, the
Light that shines on in the darkness and that the dark
ness did not overcome or put out.3 "There came a
man sent from God, whose name was John." 4 The
introduction of John the Forerunner into this con
text appears abrupt, but it is not so. The conflict be
tween Light and Darkness took a new turn when this
man of God appeared on the scene.5 John entered
the lists on the side of the Light. He came as the
Morning Star to prophesy the coming of the Sun of
Righteousness. He was the Herald of the King, the
Harbinger of the Day. " The same came for witness,
that he might bear witness of the light, that all might
believe through him." 6 The mission of this God-
moved man was to testify about the Messiah before
he was manifested and afterward, "that all might
believe through him." That was his real aim, not
that men should take him to be the Messiah. He had
• John 5 : 35; 1 : 4, 9 f.
2 John 1:8. 3 John 1 : 1-5. 4 John 1 : 6.
6 Westcott, "John," in loco. 8 John 1 : 7.

LINGERING ECHOES 305
denied that repeatedly.1 His purpose was to help
men, whose eyes were blinded, to see the Light. This
mission he fulfilled grandly, gloriously. He was able
to brush aside the misconceptions of current rabbin-
ism and help men to see how Jesus as the Messiah
fitted into the Old Testament picture. He found the
point of contact between Jesus and Malachi. He was
himself the link between the two. As the last of the
prophets he set his seal of approval upon the Messiah,
and then stepped aside or was pushed aside by Phari
see and Herod, not by Jesus. John's mission had not
failed. He lived to be able to say : "This was he of
whom I said, He that cometh after me is become be
fore me : for he was before me." 2 When he was able
to say that, he had fulfilled his mission.
Rev. F. B. Meyer, in his helpful book, "John the
Baptist," 3 has drawn a striking parallel between John
and Jesus. The lives of both were strenuous and
short. Each met boundless enthusiasm of the masses,
followed by the bitter hatred of the religious leaders.
In each case a little handful of disciples laid the dead
body in the tomb without hope. But here, Mr.
Meyer urges, the parallel ends. John's death was a
martyrdom; that of Jesus was a sacrifice. John's body
has not risen from the dead, while Jesus came out of
the grave. The disciples of John were scattered and
absorbed or perverted. Those of Jesus after the
sight of the Risen Christ united to wait for the power
of the Holy Spirit to go forth on a world conquest.
The influence of John has decreased, as he said it
• John 1: 19 f.; 3:28. 2 John 1:15. 8 Pp. 11 x.

306 JOHN THE LOYAL
would, while to-day the name of Jesus is mightier
than ever before, King of kings and Lord of lords.
This is all as it should be, as John foresaw and
wished. It is not honoring John the Baptist to sug
gest possible jealousy in his heart toward Christ. I
have called him " John the Loyal " because it is true,
and because I wished thus to set in clear light his
devotion to Jesus. That is his real glory. I have
sought to expound his greatness and his power as we
see these qualities in the gospels. But I cannot write
the last lines in this book about John without the
humble tribute of my own heart's love. Few person
alities in history hold my admiration and enthusiasm
with a firmer grip than does the rugged and pictu
resque figure who still stands silhouetted on the hori
zon at Bethany beyond Jordan in Gilead, the land
of Elijah of old. I see him standing " and he looked
upon Jesus as he walked." His heart has gone with
that look; he keeps on looking till he says : " Behold,
the Lamb of God." He can say no more. There is
no need to say more, not for John. And he never saw
him more on earth.

BIBLIOGRAPHY
The Bible dictionaries, lives of Christ, commentaries on the
gospels, all have valuable discussions of the ministry of the Bap
tist. The most important separate treatises on John the Baptist
are given below.
Barde, "Jean Baptiste" (1892).
Boissonas, "De 1' Attitude de Jean Baptiste."
Bornemann, " Die Taufe Christi durch Johannes."
Breest, "Johannes der Taufer" (1881).
Breuil, "Du Culte de S. Jean Baptiste."
Chenot, "Jean le Baptiste."
Coleridge, "Ministry of St. John the Baptist." (Vol. I of his
"Public Life of Our Lord.")
Douglas, "More Than a Prophet" (1905).
Duncan, "Life, Character, and Acts of John the Baptist" (1853).
Feather, "John the Baptist."
Gale, "The Prophet of the Highest."
Gams, "Johannes der Taufer" (1853).
Geux, "Jean Baptiste."
Haupt, "Johannes der Taufer" (1874).
Holmes, "On the Prophecies and Testimony of John the Bap
tist" (1783).
Houghton, "John the Baptist— His Life and Work" (1889).
Huxtable, "Ministry of St. John the Baptist."
Innitzer, "Johannes der Taufer" (1908).
Kbhler, "Johannes der Taufer" (1884).
Lofton, "John the Baptist" (1905).
Mandel, "Die Vorgeschichte Jesu."
McCullough, "The Peerless Prophet; or, the Life and Times of
John the Baptist" (1888).
Meyer, "John the Baptist" (1901).
Penick, "More Than a Prophet" (1881).
Reynolds, "John the Baptist" (1874).
307

308 BIBLIOGRAPHY
Rymington, "Vox Clamantis: Life and Ministry of John the
Baptist" (1882).
Simpson, "The Last of the Prophets."
Smith, "Johannes de Dooper" (1908).
Stalker, "The Two St. Johns" (1895).
Van Rohden, "John the Baptist" (1853).
Wilkinson, "A Johannine Document in the Early Chapters of
St. Luke's Gospel."

GENERAL INDEX

Aaron  6
Abia  7
Allen  54, 102, 118
Andrew  '  157
Apollos  290 ff.
Arrian  81
Bacon  132
Baptism: Origin of, 79 f .; Sig
nificance of, 82, 163 ff.; Re
lation to Christian B., 86 ff.;
Messianic, 101 ff.; of Jesus,
Significance of , 117 ff.
Bebb  84, 114
Bengel  36, 105
Bernard  175
"Biblical World"  117
Bibliography  307 f .
Birth, Hand of God in  If.
Blass  293, 296
Bond  240
Bradley  5, 45
Briggs  126
"British Weekly"  91
Broadus. .25, 41, 49, 58, 63, 71, etc.
Bruce  4, 9, 12, 13, 14, 16, 28, etc.
Burkitt  72
Buxtorf  173
Cheer for John  217 ff,
Cheyne  15, 30, 42, 82
Chowlson  82
Chrysostom  236, 240
Clement of Alexandria  57
Committee from Jerusalem. . 132 ff.
Confession  78
Consolation  251
Courage of John  222 ff.
Criticism  4 f .
Cry, The, from the Dungeon -207 ff.
Dale, J. W  88
Dalman  54
Dance  256 ff.
Daniel  11
David  7
Davis  245
Death of John Reported to
Jesus  268
Desert  27 f.
Didon  15, 17,44
Disciples of Jesus Puzzled  275
Disciples Misguided  294 ff .
Dods  83, 134, 136, 137, 139, etc. 309

Doubt  195 ff.
Drummond  132
Edersheim, 20, 36, 39, 48, 63, 71, etc.
Elijah  11
Elizabeth: 1, 4, 6, 9, 18, 25,
26, 27; Fellowship with Mary,
16 f.; Joy of, 15.
Essenes  29 f.
Farrar. .32, 34, 56, 57, 67, 68, etc.
Friendship of John and Jesus .171 ff.
Furrer  65
Geike  20, 57, 70, 81, 85, etc.
Gift to Herodias  264
Godet  22, 23, 30, 35, 37, 38, etc.
Graves, J. R  88
Grove  47
Hackett  297, 298
Harnack  1, 201
Hemerobaptists  297
Henderson  142
Herod: 10, 258 f.; Acquies
cence of, 261 f.; Sin of,
180 ff.; John's Denunciation
of, 182 ff.; Terror of, 270 ff.
Herodias: 180, 183, 254 ff.;
Dance of, 256; Demand of,
259 f.
Holtzmann, 1, 36, 37, 42, 43, 44, etc.
Isaac  4
James, Wm  2
Jeremiah  11
Jesus: Appearance' of, 111 ff.
Father's Approval of, 125 ff.
John the Baptist: A Fading
Light. Appearance of, 42 ff.;
Attitude to Jesus, 131, 170ff.;
Audience of, 58 ff .; Baptism of,
see "Baptism"; Birth, Hand
of God in, 1 f.; Burial of,
266; Call of, 33 ff.; Charac
ter Foretold, 7; Cheer for,
217 ff.; Confession of, 136 ff.;
Courage of, 222 ff.; Death
of, 263 f.; Disciples of, 156;
Doubt of, 195 ff.; Early Life,
24 ff.; Effect of Ministry,
55 ff ., 155 ff.; Fearlessness of,
65; Forerunner, 44 ft; Gen-

310

INDEX

John the Baptist — Continued
tie Reproof of, 220 ff.; Home
of, 6, 14; Identifying the
Messiah, 143 ff.; Imprison
ment of, 186; In the Desert,
27 f .; Interpretation of Jesus,
147 ff., 154 f.; Jesus' Esti
mate of, 226 ff.; Last Sight of
Jesus, 153 ff.; Likeness to
Elijah, 45 f.; Loyalty of,
167 ff.; Meeting with Jesus,
113 f.; Method of, 61 ff.;
More than a Prophet, 228 ff.;
Name of, 18; New Testimony
of, 151 ff.; Power after Death,
280 ff.; Parentage, 6; Phi
losophy of, 168 ff.; Place of
Ministry, 40 ff., 161 f .; Pow
er as Preacher, 90 ff.; Procla
mation of, 52 ff.; Reflection
of, 129 ff.; Rejection of, 243
ff.; Submission to Reign of
God, 70 ff.; Time of Ministry,
36 ff.; Testimony to Jesus,
98 ff., 176 ff.; Test of Loyal
ty, 165 ff.; Work of. Con
structive, 69 ff .
John, the Disciple  157
Jones. M  288
Josephus  27, 29, 37, 57, 67, etc.
Judgment, The Messianic  105 f .
Justin Martyr  297
Keim  28, 29, 31, 47, 64, etc.
Kirtley  121
Knowling  292, 295, 296
Kohler  78
Lambert  15, 30, 31
Lange  52, 55, 114, 122, 164
Last Look at John  303
Least in the Kingdom  235 ff.
Levites  7
Lightfoot  54, 297, 303
Lightfoot and Wetstein  54
Lodge, Sir Oliver  2
Maclaren, A  44, 231
Marcion  1
Margoliouth  82
Mary  1, 3,' 16, 17, 111
McGiffert  296
Messiah: John's Conception of,
108 f.; The Sign of, 106 ff.;
Recognized by John, 114 ff.;
Second Glimpse of, 143.
Meyer  18, 146, 150, 151, 155,
279, 305
Moulton  67
Muirhead  72
Nazirite  10
Neander  297
New Epoch  285 ff.

Nicholson  43
Nourse  31, 55, 115, 130
Othon  14
"Oxford Library of the Fa
thers"  210
Parentage  6
Paul: 10; Impression of, 287.
Peter  9
Pharisees. . 10, 190 ff., 202 f., 243 ff.
Plummer, 1, 2, 4, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, etc.
Political Excuse  192 ff.
Pressense1  46
Priscilla and Aquila  292, 295
Prophets, The Last of the . . . 226 ff .
Ramsay  2
Reformation  88 ff.
Rejection  243
Religious Teachers, Sins of . . . .63 ff.
Renan  114
Rendall  293, 295, 302
Repent (meaning of)  75 f.
Repentance  74
Reproof of John  220 ff.
Resentment of Herod and He
rodias  186 ff .
Reynolds . . 25, 28, 30, 31, 47, 48, etc.
Robertson  236
Samson  4
Samuel  4
Sanday  72, 132, 219
Schoettgen  47
Schuerer  30, 63, 106
Schweitzer  72
Scripture Record: Value of,
2 f .; Date of, 3.
Sign from Heaven  122 ff.
Sins (Remission of)  76 f.
Smith.. 15, 29, 31, 34, 40, 52, ete.
Stalker  75, 147, 150, 239, etc.
Stanley  41
Strauss  211
Swete  42, 56, 123
Tasker  32, 34
Tiberius  37, 39
Weiss  4, 21, 44, 53, 79, 85, ete.
Wellhausen  63
Westcott  60, 77, 79, 134, 135,
„ 136, 137, etc.
Westcott and Hort  22, 46
Wetstein  67
Whitsitt  174
Wonder of the People  95 ff.
Wordsworth  31
Zacharias: 6, 7, 8, 9, 13, 14,
15, 16, 18, 19, 25, 26, 27, 71,
etc.; Insight of, 20 ff.; Scep
ticism of, 11.
Zahn  233

SCRIPTURE INDEX

Genesis
REP. PAGE
4 : 2-6  12
13:10f  40
24:1  6
25:22  16
33: 18  161
40 : 14  277
40 : 20 ff  255
49:23  186
Exodus
4:25  18
7 : 4 f  19
15:20  257
24:15  171
Leviticus
5:5  78
6 : 12 f  105
11: Iff  80
11 : 22  43
12 : 1 ff  .• . . 80
13 : 1 ff  80
14 : 1 ff  80
15 : 1 ff  80
16 : 13  14
16:21  78
18 : 12 ff  183
18 : 16  182
20:21  182
NuMBEHS
4:3  112
4:23  112
4:30  112
4:43  112
4:47  112
6 : 24-26  14
19 : 1 ff  80
Deuteronomy
18:15  138
28:4  17
31 : 16  171
Joshua.
13:1  6
15 : 55  14
21:16  14

Judges
6:36-39  12
I Samuel
18:6  257
II Samuel
6:21  257
7:13  71
7:16  71
I Kings
7:1  185
17:1  44
18 : 1 f  185
19 : 2  277
19 : 10  277
19:19  42
II Kings
1:8  43
1 : 15  185
3 : 15  19
6:17  8
20 : 8  12
I Chronicles
24 : 10  7
II Chronicles
28:12f  9
Ezba
7:6  19
Psalms
2:7  126, 152
2 : 12  152
45 : 1 f  171
73:27  171
82:6  152
89 : 1 ff  71
110:1  17
113:4  16
113:6  16
118:26  215
311

Proverbs
8: Iff  261
9 : 1 ff  251
28:13  76
Isaiah
1 : 16 f  75
7:11  12
8: 14  220
9:2  24
9:6  71
9:7  71
11 : 1-10  71
11 : 2  102
13:9  65
34:8-10  105
35:5  219
40:1-11  11
40:3  32,47, 139
40:3-5  49
40 : 4 f  65
40 : 6  50
40 : 10 f  49
42: 1  126
52:15  79
53: Iff  77, 150
53 : 5  148
53 : 7  32, 77, 148
53: 12  148
54:5...,  219
55:7  75
61 : 1  219
63:16  11
66:24  32
Jeremiah
7:3  75
7:7  75
23:5  71
23:6  71
Ezekiel
16: Iff  171
18:19-32  75
36:25-27  75, 103
37:25  79
37:24  71
Daniel
3:25  12
5 : 1 ff  257

312

INDEX

7:13  215
8:16  12
10 : 13  13
10:21  12,13
12:1  13
Hosea
2:8  171
6:6  55
Joel
2 : 12 f  75
2:28  103
2:31  65
3:1  103
MlCAH
4:1-8  11
6:2  107
6:8  75
Zechariah
1 : 34  75
9:9  99
13:1  79
13:4..  42,91
Malachi
1:3  1
2:11  171
3:1... 45, 50, 99, 228
3:2  65, 104
3:19  104
3:23  276
4:1... 50, 65, 104, 106
4:4f  276
4:5  46,50, 137
4:6  277
Matthew
1:9  112
2:4f  107
2:14  200
2:22  180
3: 1  35,36,40,45
3 : 1-12  5
3:2... .36,53,73,74
3:3  45,139
3:4  42,43,44
3:5  58, 133
3:6  43,78
3: 7.. 58, 59, 88, 89,
133, 183, 203
3:7-10  63
3:8  74, 251
3:9  67
3 :10.67, 103, 143,213
3: 11.. 73, 75, 97, 99,
101, 102, 103, 161,
213, 237, 288, 294,
299, 300

3: 11 f  86,87
3 : 12. . . . 103, 105, 213
3: 13  112, 113
3 : 13 ff  87
3: 14  18, 111,114, 116, 119
3 : 14 f  88
3: 15  117
3: 16  122
3 : 17  125, 152
4:8  135
4: 12. .5, 162, 190,290
4: 17  53,74,201
4: 25  202
5:3ff  17, 220
5 : 20  203
6:9  100
6 : 26  105
7: 12  198
7: 19  247
7 : 20  251
7 : 28 f  103
9 : 9 ff  62
9 : 10. . . . 199, 202, 242
9: 11  47,199
9 : 13 f  78
9: 14.. 5, 30, 79, 200,
290, 296
9: 15. ...172, 201, 238
9 : 17  187
9 : 22-26  204
9 :34  202, 249
0 : 20  273
0:41  299
1 : 2... 184, 195, 201,
209, 218, 296
1 : 2 f  175, 290
1:2-19  5
1 :3  48, 95, 207
1 :4f  218
1:6  220
1 :7  59,221, 225
1:8  184
1:9  79, 226
1 : 10  228
1:11.. 87, 100, 223,
231, 235
1 : llf  79
1 : 12  57, 242
l:12f  36
1 : 13  228
1 : 14.. 45, 46, 50, 229
1 :15  229,276
1 : 16  247
1: 16 f  246

18.
19.
29... 18...
23 ff.
24 f.

98
251 124 126
249273
24-26  249
34  65
41  75,299
9  229
30  105
43  229
If  269

14

1-12.

 254

14

2....

...273,274

14

3 

 186

14

3-12.

 5

14

4....

183, 188
198, 261
 258

14

5....

14

6 

14

8....

...254,260

14

9....

...259,262

14

11...

 264

14

12...

70, 266, 268

14

13...

 269

IH

4. . . .

 48

16

13...

 275

16

14...

. . . 138, 273

16

18 f..

 71

16

21 f..

 149

16

25...

 238

17

5 

. . . 125, 275

17

6 

 275

17

9 

 278

17

10...

 46, 48

17

10-13

.45, 137.S276

17

11...

...47, 231

17

12.11

46, 266, 277

17

12 f..

 5

17

13...

....47,278

IK

1 

 237

19

13...

 11

21)

1-16.

 233

21

23-27

 5

21

24 f..

...282, 118

21

25. . . .

80, 120, 285

21

25 f. .

 283

?1

25 ff
25-27

 79

21

 188

21

26. . . .

. 10, 56, 227

21

27...

 284

21 : 30  74
21:31  244
21: 32.. 5, 56, 80, 188,
191, 243, 245, 285
22 : 1 f  172
22 : 42 ff  17
23 : 1 ff  185
24: Iff  54, 106
24 : 15  229
24 : 50  95
25: Iff. ..54, 106, 172
26:45f  54,99
27 : 3  74
27 : 46  127
28: 19  86,87, 301
Mark
1:1  36
1 :2  45,228
1 : 2-8  5
1 :4  40,76, 101
1 : 5.56,58,78,84, 133
1 :6  42,43
1 :7..95, 97, 99, 100.
142, 237, 288

7f  86,87
8.. 73, 102, 103,294
9  78
9f  87

INDEX

313

Mark— 1 :
1 :
1 :
1

¦Continued
10  122
11  126
14  5, 162, 201
15  47, 53, 74
45  202
2 : 10-12  202
2: 15  199, 20
2 : 16  199
2: 18. .5, 69, 200, 202,
209, 296
2 : 19 f  172
2:20  201
3:6  42
3 : 16  203
3:21  116
3 : 22 ff  249
5:35-43  204
6 : 12  74
14.... 269, 273, 274
14-29  254
15  273
17  186,192,195
17-29  5
18  183
19... 186, 187, 197,
198, 254
6 : 20.. 184, 186, 187,
188, 197, 198, 261, 271
6:21  194, 255
6:22  258, 259
6:23  259
6: 24  260
6:25  261
6 : 26  262
6:28  264
6: 29  266,290,296
30f  269
27  275
7  125, 275
9  278
11  47,276
11 f  45,46
12.. 11, 47, 277, 278
13.-5,230,266,277
34  238
38 f  239
12  183
38 f  104
9  215
18  280
27  280
27-33  5
29 f  282
31  283
32  56, 283
33  284
30  100
5  10
35 f  213

9:9:9: 10 10
11 111111
11111111121414

Luke

1:1-4  2
1:4  293
1 :5-25  1,5
1:6  6

1:7  6
1:12  19
1:14  18
1 : 15  1, 99, 233
1 : 17. .71,90,137,230, 244, 277
1 : 18  12, 209
1:21  95
1:22  18
1:25  15
1 : 35  125
1:36-45  5
1:36-56  1
1 : 38  12
1:39  14
1:43 i  16
1 : 57-80  1, 5
1:59  18
1:61  18
1:63  19
1 :66  1
1 :68f  22, 23
1 :79  24
1 :80...24, 27, 35, 205
2:14  24
2: 19  Ill
2:25  71
2 : 23-38  52
2 : 25 ff  149
2:29f  248
2:34  156
2:35  146
2:38  72
2 : 40  95
2 : 49  123
2:50  19, 111
2:52  Ill
3:1  37
3 : 1-20  5
3:2  35, 78,99
3: 3.-40,69,75,76,101
3:4  24
3:7  56,84,89
3:7-9  63
3:8  74,88, 102
3:9  108
3:10  90
3:10-14  61
3: 12  79,89,90
3 : 14  90
3: 15.. 14, 19, 78, 95,
133, 135
3: 16  96, 99,102,
103, 142, 237, 288, 294
3 : 16 f  86, 87
3: 17  32, 103, 105
3 : 18  61, 73
3 : 19  61, 186, 187
3 : 19 f . . 162, 180, 185
3:21  112, 122
3 : 21 f  87
3 : 22  126
3 :23  38, 112
3 : 24  124
3 : 32  184
4 :41  202
5 :26  202
5 :29  199

5 : 30  199
5:31f  250
5:32  74
5 :33.5, 69, 200, 296
5 : 34 f  172
5:36  201
6:1  204
6:7  271
7: 11-18  204
7: 18  198,201
7: 18 f  296
7:18-35  5
7: 19.... 175, 207, 209
7:21  218
7 : 22  218
7 : 23  220
7:24  59,221,222
7 : 24 f  224
7 : 26  226
7 : 27  228
7:28  10, 231, 235
7 :29  56, 120, 242
7:29f  85, 243
7:30  56,98
7 :32  246
7:33  98, 199
7:33f  247, 248
7 : 36  251
7 : 39  19
9:7  269, 273
9 : 7-9  254
9:8  273
9:9  5, 274
9:31  278
9:34  275
9:35  125, 275
9 : 54  238
10:30-37  62
11 : 1 ..5,69, 199,296
11 : 18  204
11:38  80
11 : 39  260
12:50  104
13:3  74
13 : 5  74
13 : 6-9  68
13 :31ff  191,192
13:32  181
13 : 35  215
15 : 1-32  250
15:7  74
15 : 10  74
16: 16.-5,36, 57, 228,
239, 242, 287
17:4  74
18 : 12  200
18:13  78
18:21  219
18:37  239
18 : 38  88
19 :8  62, 63
19:11  71
19 : 16  233
19 :38  215
19 :48  280
20: 1  280, 281
20:1-8  5
20:2  281

314 INDEX
20:3f  282 1:45  55 ACTS
20:6  283 1:51  123
20 : 7  284 2 : 1-11  249
22:24  239 2:5  Ill 1:3-8  294
22:43  8 2:13  204 1:5  3,102,104
23 : 8  274 2 : 13 ff. . . .51, 69, 191 1:6  108
23:51  71 2:23ff  161 1:22  5,286
24:47  75 2:25  224 2:1  39
24:49  294 3:16-21  176 2: If  294
26 : 6-12  285 3 : 1 ff  161 2 : 16-24  103
3 : 22  162 2 : 38  75, 86
3 : 22-36  5 2 : 39  298
3:23  41,42 2:41  86
John 3:23-26  101 3: If  294
3:24  162 3:5  96
1:1-5  304 3:25  83,296 3:10  14
1:4  74, 304 3 : 26. .51, 83, 86, 87, 3 : 22  138
1:6  78, 92, 304 131, 165, 171, 209 3 : 39  298
1 : 6 f  70 3 : 26-30  70 4:6  39
1:6-8  5 3:27£f  168,210 4:13  14,20
1:7  304 3:28  171,305 4:28  19
l:7ff  117 3:28f..  303 4:30  19
1:8  149,175,304 3 : 29. . ..160, 171, 200 7:37  138
1:9  99,175 3:30  174 8:2  77
l:9f  304 3:31  99 8:18  10
1:10  175,277 3:31-36  176 9:9  32
1 : 11  50, 141 4:1  5, 296 9 : 17f  302
1 : 15.. 5, 101, 145,305 4:lf  83,86,160, 10:37  5,287
1:17  46 184,190 10 : 44 ff  302
1:19  30,134,207 4:3  103,162 11:16  5,102
l:19f  305 4:36  52 11:18  75
1 :19ff..5, 45, 59, 97, 4:37  157 11:21  19
170,224,282 5:10-18  203 12: If  9
1 : 20. . . .135, 136, 229 5 : 19-29  203 12 : 8  100
1:21  11,137 5:30  60 12 : 24 f  5
l:21f  46,48,72 5:33  149 13:11  13,19
1 : 22  138 5 : 33 ff  5, 203 13 : 23 ff  288
1:23  32,45 5:35  70,97,225, 13:24  75
1 : 23 f  139 234, 282, 304 13 : 24 ff  102
1:24  148 6:14  138 13:25  97
1 : 25.. 79, 134,164,191 6:30  273 15:2  163
1 : 26... 145, 146, 170, 6:63  91 15:31  75
288 7:27  107 16:24  189
1:28.41,42,113,132, 7:31  107,117 17:30  74
134, 142, 170 7 : 33  117 18 : 24  291
1:29  32,77,114, 7:40  138 18:25  5,87,291,
129, 143, 213, 237, 7 : 41 f  107 294. 297
287,303 7:47f  245 18:26  292
1 : 30... 144, 170, 229, 8:33  67 18:27  295
300 8:53  67 18:28  291,294
1 : 31. ...110, 145, 146 10:4  287 19:1... 295
l:31f  108 10:40  41 19:1-7  70
l:31ff  1,114 10: 40-42... 5, 51, 157 19:1-10  86
1 : 32... 117, 123, 141, 10:41  52 19:2  296,298
147,151,170 11:27  12,99 19 : 2 ff  102
1 : 33... 102, 109, 124, 11 : 39 f  12 19:3  296,299
151 12:28  125 19 : 3 ff  5
1:34  151,289 12:44-50  176 19 : 4. .71, 75, 86, 270,
1 : 35... 114, 153, 170, 13:6  117 289.299
237,296 15:26ff  294 19:5  292,301
1 : 35 f  151 16 : 16  296 19 : 6  302
l:35ff  86,303 17:5  127 19:7... 295
1:36  154 17:24  127 19:18  78
1:37  156,296 18:13  39 20:21.. 74
1 : 38  157 18 : 19  39 20 : 24  ! ! ! ! 289
1:39  158 19:12  281 23 : 1 ff  3
1:40  154 19:27  50 24:47 74
1:41  55.158 20:22...;  294 26 : 1 ff  '.'."' 255

INDEX

315

26 : 20  74
26:24  16
Romans
2:4  74
6: Iff  66,88
6 : 2-6  122
7: Iff  66
8 : 1 ff  66
10 : 8 ff  78
I Corinthians
3:4  291
13: 13  235
15:16ff  8
16: 12  191
18:4  235
23:11  235
II Corinthians
3:10f  241
7:8  74
7:9  74
7:10  74
11: Iff  241
11:2  172
Galatians
4 : 1 ff  66
5 : 1 ff  66
Ephesians
1 :19  100
5:32f  172

Philippians
3:8  68
I Thessalonians
2:8  62
I Timothy
5:20  185
6:4  163
6:20  105
II Timothy
2:23  163
2 : 25  75
4:7  289
4 : 10  189
4: 13  189
4:21  189
Titus
3:9  ,  167
Hebrews
1:14  13
3 : 5 f  71
5:7  100, 213
6:1  74
6:2  164
6: 18  100
9 : 10  80, 164
10:37  215
11 : 26 f  252
11:37  43
12:17  74

James
1 : 1 ff  66
1:8  187
2:21  67
4:4  172
I Peter
1 : 1 ff  66
1 : 7 f  104
1 : 10  154
II Peter
1 : 1 ff  66
3 : 12  95
3:14  95
I John
1 : 1 ff  66
1:9  76
Jude
9  13
Revelation
2:5  74
3:3  74
5:12  100
12:7  15
19:7  172
21 : 2  172
21 : 9  172
22 : 17  172

Epochs in the Life of Jesus
A Study of Development and Struggle
in the Messiah's Work
By A. T. ROBERTSON, D.D.
Professor of New Testament Interpretation in the Southern Baptist
Theological Seminary
Price $1.00 net
A straightforward, constructive discussion of the career
of Jesus as set forth in the Gospels. There is no technical
criticism of the sources, though the writer has reached his
own conclusions on many points which come out incidentally.
It forms a positive presentation of the career of Jesus in the
light of modern knowledge and in full sympathy with the
position given to Christ in the Gospels.
Just the book that thousands need, as is shown by its
steady sale.
Rev. Prof. David Smith, author of "In the Days of His Flesh,"
Magee College, Ireland, in his Introduction to the British edition of
Dr. Robertson's book :
" It is intelligible to the layman and will profit the expert. It is
the harvest of long, diligent, and loving labor on the widest and richest
of fields."
Missionary Record of The United Free Church, Scotland:
" Those to whom the life of Christ is a never-ending study will here
find it handled with the skill of a scholar and the affection of a saint."
Record of Christian Work, Northfield:
" This little volume is pure cream. Dr. Robertson is gifted with
a telling style. His sentences are like pistol-shots."
The American Church Sunday-School Magazine, Philadelphia:
"From the first essay to the eighth, on 'The Final Triumph of
Jesus,' the book has been meat and drink to us."
The Aberdeen Free Press, Scotland:
" The book reminds us in many ways of Professor Bruce's first and
greatest book, 'The Training of the Twelve.' We have much of the
same directness, of the same insight into the mind of Jesus."
The Christian Index, Atlanta:
" One really feels, as he closes the book, that he has been with the
Master."

Epochs in the Life of Paul
By the Same Author
Price $1.25 net
This book has met the same hearty reception in
America and Britain.
The Westminster Teacher, Philadelphia:
" If I were teaching a class in the life of Paul to young men and
women in training for Christian service, I should use Dr. Robertson's
work as a text-book in preference to any other I know."
The Courier- Journal, Louisville:
" A sort of prescience seems to guide his pen. . . . Indeed, it
seems to the reader as if never before has Paul been presented as so
living an individual."
The Churchman, London:
" It is written in the full light of the latest and best works on
the subject. . . . We know nothing like it as a thorough introduction
to the study of St. Paul's career. ... It is a marvel of compression,
clearness, and ability. It reveals a thorough mastery of the subject
in all its bearings, and is a first-rate example of able, open-eyed,
conservative scholarship."
The Scotsman, Edinburgh:
" The brightness of the word-painting, the unconventional fresh
ness of the phrasing, and the vivid modernizing of the numerous
details in the sketch make it eminently reasonable and certain of a
cordial welcome from many classes."
The Free Press, Aberdeen, Scotland:
" It has been a common superstition that Farrar wrote the best
living picture of the great Apostle ; but whoever reads Dr. Robertson's
study will relegate Farrar to the shelf. This book lacks the rhetoric
of the other, and it is briefer, but in sound scholarship and vivid
force it is miles ahead."
CHARLES SCRIBNER'S SONS
153-157 Fifth Avenue, NewYork

3 9002

1

II I

l< I

:iliii!!ii!i

iii