Scripture: John 1:24-28
Date: May 29, 2011
Speaker: Sean Higgins
You don’t want to be a Pharisee. Most of us know that already, but “Pharisee” has become an unhelpful cartoon image in our minds. Pharisees were real guys, who knew and practiced God’s Word scrupulously, even adding to the Law in order to ensure obedience. They were also among the group most severely confronted and condemned by Jesus and John the Baptist.
With very little background, John the evangelist records an incident between John the Baptist and some of the priests and Levites in John 1:19-28. Last week, in verses 19-23, we read that a delegation of priests and Levites were sent to John to investigate, and more likely, to stop his baptizing. They demonstrated decent knowledge of the Old Testament, end-times prophecies. Four rounds of questions aimed to clarify John’s identity. He confessed, he did not deny, but confessed that he was not the Christ, he was not Elijah, nor was he the prophet promised by Moses. After increased annoyance among the committee, John affirmed that he was “the voice of one crying out in the wilderness, ‘Make straight the way of the Lord,’” a quotation from Isaiah 40.
This should have caused at least two reactions on the part of the priests and Levites: humble repentance and receipt of the Lord. They should have confessed their sin and put their trust in the King. The Baptist was an end-times figure after all; he did precede and announce the Messiah, and the interviewers totally missed it. They missed the pointer and the point: repent for the kingdom of God is at hand.
In verses 19-23, John’s identity was under the microscope. The basic question was: Who do you think you are? The same interchange continues in this paragraph, verses 24-28, as they press the Baptist further, questioning his credentials and asking: What gives you the right to do what you’re doing? Certainly they thought they made their point trapped him in a corner. In reality, they condemned themselves as point-missers.
They ask one follow-up question in this section and John gives one answer. But interestingly, John the apostle adds a parenthesis in verse 24. He could have just continued from verse 23, moving from round four to round five without interruption. The question in verse 25 is the money question, the one they thought would humble and condemn the Baptist. But this clue, the context clarification in verse 24, is crucial.
We knew the priests and Levites were sent by some Jews in Jerusalem (John 1:19), now the story comes into better focus.
(Now they had been sent from the Pharisees.) (verse 24)
Interpreters and translators disagree about how to understand verse 24. Some take it that it was Pharisees who had been sent (KJV, NIV), so the “priests and Levites” were also Pharisees; others take it that the Pharisees were senders (ESV, NAS). A primary argument that Pharisees were sent and not senders is that the Pharisees didn’t have enough authority to commission such a delegation. Arguments that Pharisees were the senders and not the sent are first, there are multiple ways that the grammar could have made that identification obvious (such as an article before the participle, making the participle substantival and the subject of the sentence) and most significant, most priests and Levites were not Pharisees. I think the Pharisees were involved in the sending.
Did the Pharisees have any history with John? Any reason why they might not want to come to John themselves? It comes together with the money question in verse 25. It connects with their wounded religious egos when John the Baptist called them a brood of vipers and refused to baptize them in front of “Jerusalem and all Judea and all the region about the Jordan” (Matthew 3:5).
We can understand why the general religious establishment would be concerned about this eccentric guy running around outside Jerusalem. We can understand sending a group of guys, the protocol police, to find out more about the baptizer. But this tipoff in verse 24, that Pharisees were behind it, exposes an investigation with less than honest inquiry. The agenda was personal, to put the Baptist in his place, to humble him, to stop him, and to make him look silly. The episode did make someone(s) look silly.
Because the priests and Levites didn’t listen to the Baptist’s actually answer about who he was, they thought they had him where they wanted him.
They asked him, “Then why are you baptizing, if you are neither the Christ, nor Elijah, nor the Prophet?” (verse 25)
When you position yourself as the authority, you don’t always wait to hear the answer from the people you’re questioning. You’ve already decided they need to be rebuked after all, the questions are a formality, a part of the process that drives the point deeper. This question from the priest and the Levites proves that they only heard what they wanted to hear.
”If you aren’t the Christ or Elijah or the prophet,” which has been established. John fully owned it; he gave them all three of those things. Their “then” comment ignores John’s answer from Isaiah 40. Either they didn’t think that was relevant or they weren’t paying attention. They had already built the frame around whatever the Baptist painted.
”If you aren’t any of those, then you are baptizing…why?” As if to say, You dug your own grave, you don’t have a good answer, but we’ll ask it so that as you try to think of an answer, you’re realize for yourself how miserably wrong you are.
The focus of their concern was John’s baptizing. They didn’t ask about his preaching, but this particular practice. Baptizing was so much associated with John that we refer to him as “John the Baptist.” That wasn’t his birth name. To distinguish him from other John’s in the New Testament, he is referred to as “the one baptizing.”
Again, John the apostle doesn’t give us any background. But we should consider why they were so upset about his baptism.
Baptisms happened before the institution of Christian, believer’s baptism. Baptism was a fairly common practice as a symbol of cleansing for Gentile proselytes converting to Judaism. Jews didn’t need to be baptized because they were already in.
When John came baptizing, he was calling individual Jews to repent, to confess their sins, their uncleanness, and receive the Christ and His kingdom. Jews thought they were already in based on descent from Abraham (see Matthew 3:9). John’s baptism was a humbling thing, and humiliation was not something the Pharisees were interested in. So they tagged John’s behavior as unlawful and sought to stop it.
When they came out to join the crowd being baptized, John confronted them in their pride (Matthew 3). That’s important in light of John’s answer in verse 26.
John goes for their religious throat, from the side, not because his answer isn’t straightforward, but because they weren’t looking straight.
John answered them, “I baptize with water, but among you stands one you do not know, even he who comes after me, the strap of whose sandal I am not worthy to untie.” (verses 26-27)
Note that he doesn’t really answer their question, at least not obviously to them. They asked Why?, and he answers How? and then Who? Note also that John seemingly leaves unfinished a comparison to his baptism.
”I baptize with water.” That doesn’t answer Why? They probably knew he was baptizing “with water.” And rather than completing the comparison and giving the answer we’re more familiar with, that Jesus baptizes with the Holy Spirit (which he does get to in verse 33 on the following day), John starts talking about One they didn’t know.
”among you stands (One) you do not know.” How does John know that the priests and the Levites (and by extension, the Pharisees) didn’t know the Christ? Because they weren’t humbly repenting. They wanted not to repent so much that they questioned the credentials of the guy calling them to repent. It was a deflection technique, but a transparent technique to those who have eyes to see.
Why didn’t they want to repent? Because they wanted the preeminence. They were unwilling to give up their pride. They were unwilling to acknowledge another’s worth. That’s why John continues, “even he who comes after me, the strap of whose sandal I am not worthy to untie.” He says, “the One coming after me—the One you don’t know—is so glorious that I am not worthy even to loose the his shoelaces.” One historian wrote that disciples were required to do everything a slave would do for his master, except take off his shoes (see Kostenberger). The Baptist confessed that he wasn’t even high enough to be at this lowest level.
This confronts religiously proud people. Lack of humility proves that they are missing the point. It proves that they don’t really know the worthy One. The Pharisees fragile egos were broken, but not their hearts. They tried to cover themselves by power plays, by investigative delegations, and by questions they thought would humiliate John.
But they missed that John was already below them. John was humbled before Jesus more than before them. When you know your place, it’s hard for others to hurt you; their attempts backfire.
John is answering their Why? Why is he baptizing? Because he humbly serves a higher authority, an authority that the Pharisees beat against rather than bowed before.
John the apostle doesn’t provide the part about baptism of the Holy Spirit here because he’s making a different point. You can’t have Jesus, you can’t have the Spirit, and also have your pride. You want Jesus? You want baptism with the Holy Spirit? You want forgiveness of sins? You want to see the kingdom of heaven? Repent. Bow. Be humble.
The apostle John wraps up day one with a location comment.
These things took place in Bethany across the Jordan, where John was baptizing. (verse 28)
There are two places named Bethany in the the Fourth Gospel, this location is “across the Jordan” (see John 3:26; 10:40), the other was a little southeast of Jerusalem on the road to Jericho where Lazrus was raised (see John 11:1, 18). It seems that “Batanea” was actually a region rather than a city, and “this variant spelling of ‘Batanea’ [was] chosen by the evangelist to underscore that Jesus’ ministry began and ended in ‘Bethany.’ At Bethany in the (Galilean) north, John the Baptist confesses Jesus as ‘God’s lamb’; at Bethany in the (Judean) south, Jesus nears his crucifixion” (Kostenberger).
Who was condemned, John or the priests and Levites? Both. The priests and Levites didn’t start supporting John’s ministry. They didn’t fund the purchase of a trailer and portable dunk tank for more itinerant baptizing. No, they persisted in their condemnation, and certainly reported back to their superiors that they put John in his place. They asked a condemning question, they didn’t realize they were throwing a boomerang. I say that to say that we probably won’t avoid every condemnation, but one kind of condemnation hurts others more than it hurts us, especially if we’re humble.
Who was humbled, John or the religious leaders? Again, both. The religious leaders were shamed by John for their ignorance of the worthy One. But they didn’t cut John down to size as they intended. He was already lower than they could make him anyway. John’s humbling answer did put them in their place, even if they couldn’t see it. But he didn’t put them in their (proper, humbled) place so he could get their (presumed, exalted) place. The difference is that John’s humbling answer was from his joy. It is hard to be humbled, but it’s happy to be humble.
We will go to all sorts of lengths to avoid humble repentance, and to the degree that we’re successful staying away from humility, we distance ourselves from Christ.
I know that the Pharisees are a cartoon of religious pride. But these are the people who get most upset by Jesus and his witnesses.