And this is the witness of John ( ). He had twice already alluded to it (verses John 1:7; John 1:15) and now he proceeds to give it as the most important item to add after the Prologue. Just as the author assumes the birth narratives of Matthew and Luke, so he assumes the Synoptic accounts of the baptism of Jesus by John, but adds various details of great interest and value between the baptism and the Galilean ministry, filling out thus our knowledge of this first year of the Lord’s ministry in various parts of Palestine. The story in John proceeds along the same lines as in the Synoptics. There is increasing unfolding of Christ to the disciples with increasing hostility on the part of the Jews till the final consummation in Jerusalem.

When the Jews sent unto him ( ). John, writing in Ephesus near the close of the first century long after the destruction of Jerusalem, constantly uses the phrase “the Jews” as descriptive of the people as distinct from the Gentile world and from the followers of Christ (at first Jews also). Often he uses it of the Jewish leaders and rulers in particular who soon took a hostile attitude toward both John and Jesus. Here it is the Jews from Jerusalem who sent (, first aorist active indicative of ).

Priests and Levites ( ). Sadducees these were. Down below in verse 24 the author explains that it was the Pharisees who sent the Sadducees. The Synoptics throw a flood of light on this circumstance, for in Mt 3:7 we are told that the Baptist called the Pharisees and Sadducees “offspring of vipers” (Lu 3:7). Popular interest in John grew till people were wondering “in their hearts concerning John whether haply he were the Christ” (Lu 3:15). So the Sanhedrin finally sent a committee to John to get his own view of himself, but the Pharisees saw to it that Sadducees were sent.

To ask him ( ). Final and the first aorist active subjunctive of , old verb to ask a question as here and often in the Koine to ask for something (Joh 14:16) like .

Who art thou? ( ;). Direct question preserved and note proleptic position of , “Thou, who art thou?” The committee from the Sanhedrin put the question sharply up to John to define his claims concerning the Messiah.

Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament

1 ) “And this is the record of John,” (kai aute estin he marturia tou loannou) ”And this is the witness or testimony of John,” of John the Baptist. His testimony was important for four reasons: 1) First, he was sent to prepare the way for and identify the Messiah, 2) Second, because of his personal knowledge of Jesus, 3) Third, because of his own holiness of life, and 4) Fourth, because of his own disclaimer of being interested in any position of honor among men, but to exalt Jesus, Mat 3:11-12.

2) “When the Jews sent priests and Levites from Jerusalem,” (hote apesteilan pros auton hoi loudaioi eks lerosolumon hiereis kai Levitas) “When the Jews out of Jerusalem sent (delegated priests and Levites to him; When John received this deputation, he was receiving an hostile committee that was fearful of losing their own positions as scribes, priests, and presbyters, if he were the Messiah, or the Messiah should soon come to culminate their religious positions of employment.

3) “To ask him, who art thou?” (hina erotesosin auton su tis ei) “in order that they might quiz him: “who are you?” or interrogate John about himself, not about his name, or his birth, but who, or what personage do you claim to be? Because the masses were in suspense, some thinking that he himself might be the Messiah, the Christ, Luk 3:15. This is the beginning of the historical part of the Gospel. This event occurred after the baptism and temptation of Jesus. The ecclesiastical center of Judaism in Jerusalem had been shaken with fear and curiosity at the preaching of John, and the report of his repeated affirmation that the Christ was at hand, soon to begin His “Kingdom of Heaven,” program of “Service and Worship,” Mat 3:2.

Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary

19. And this is the testimony. Hitherto the Evangelist has related the preaching of John about Christ; he now comes down to a more illustrious testimony, which was delivered to the ambassadors of the Priests, that they might convey it to Jerusalem. He says, therefore, that John openly confessed for what purpose he was sent by God. The first inquiry here is, for what purpose the Priests put questions to him. It is generally believed that, out of hatred to Christ, they gave to John an honor which did not belong to him; but this could not be the reason, for Christ was not yet known to them. Others say that they were better pleased with John, because he was of the lineage and order of the priesthood; but neither do I think that this is probable; for since they expected from Christ all prosperity, why did they voluntarily contrive a false Christ ? I think, therefore, that there was another reason that induced them. It was now a long time since they had the Prophets; John came suddenly and contrary to expectation; and the minds of all were aroused to expect the Messiah. Besides, all entertained the belief that the coining of the Messiah was at hand.

That they may not appear to be careless about their duty, if they neglect or disguise a matter of so great importance, they ask John, Who art thou ? At first, therefore, they did not act from malice, but, on the contrary, actuated by the desire of redemption, they wish to know if John be the Christ, because he begins to change the order which had been customary in the Church. And yet I do not deny that ambition, and a wish to retain their authority, had some influence over them; but nothing certainly was farther from their intention than to transfer the honor of Christ to another. Nor is their conduct in this matter inconsistent with the office which they sustain; for since they held the government of the Church of God, it was their duty to take care that no one rashly obtruded himself, that no founder of a new sect should arise, that the unity of faith should not be broken in the Church, and that none should introduce new and foreign ceremonies. It is evident, therefore, that a report about John was widely spread and aroused the minds of all; and this was arranged by the wonderful Providence of God, that this testimony might be more strikingly complete.

Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary

PART II. (A.)

CHAPTERS Joh. 1:19 to Joh. 4:54

I. THE MANIFESTATION OF THE WORD AS LIGHT AMONG THOSE PREPARED TO RECEIVE HIM (Joh. 1:19-51)

1. The testimony of John the Baptist:

(1) he is not the Christ, etc. (Joh. 1:19-21);

(2) he is the voice of the promised herald (Joh. 1:23).

2. He proclaims to the messengers of the Sanhedrin the dignity of Christ (Joh. 1:24-28).

3. He testifies, to his disciples, of Christ as the antitype of divine ordinance and the fulfilment of prophetic promise (Joh. 1:29-31), his faith having been confirmed by the incidents which transpired at the baptism of Jesus (Joh. 1:32-34).

4. Johns disciples are pointed to Jesus (Joh. 1:35-40).

5. Jesus reveals Himself to individual disciples:

(1) to Simon (Joh. 1:41-42);

(2) to Philip (Joh. 1:43-44); and

(3) to Nathanael the Israelite without guile (Joh. 1:45-51).

6. To these He reveals Himself as

(1) the Messiah (Joh. 1:41);

(2) the Son of God, in whom Old Testament predictions find their fulfilment (Joh. 1:45-49);

(3) the Son of man, by whom the heavenly stairway which Jacob saw in a vision is realised and completed (Joh. 1:50-51).

EXPLANATORY AND CRITICAL NOTES

THE WITNESS OF JOHN THE BAPTIST (Joh. 1:19-37)

Joh. 1:19. Here the historical narrative of the gospel begins. The point of time may be considered as soon after the baptism of Jesus by John, which was to the latter the testimony of Jesus Messiahship (Joh. 1:33-34). This is the record, etc.As we learn from Mat. 3:7, many of the Jewish leaders had been attracted by the Baptists teaching; and the people as a whole were so moved by it that all men mused in their hearts of John whether he were the Christ (Luk. 3:15). Indeed so much attention did Johns teaching attract that the Jews sent priests and Levites to ask him, Who art thou? St. John was writing his Gospel as a universal treatise, and it was necessary for him to use the term the Jews, as he constantly does. It frequently refers to the ecclesiastical leaders of the people. The term is used historically. The Levites are seldom mentioned in the New Testament, and the general idea of expositors is that they were identical with the Scribes. At all events it seems reasonable to conclude from such a passage as Neh. 8:7-8, that the remnant of this tribe in our Lords day still continued to be students and scribes of the law. Who art thou?Bishop Wordsworth remarks that there is here an indirect testimony to the miraculous occurrences of which the birth of John the Baptist was the centre. There is no doubt that these occurrences would be known and remembered in priestly and ecclesiastical circles. Hence the willingness of the Jewish leaders to accept John as the Messiah.

Joh. 1:20. Johns answer shows that he as well as his interrogators understood the bearing of this question. He confessed indicates in effect the spontaneity and eagerness with which the declaration was made. The same thought follows in a negative form, he denied not, to show that he did not for an instant yield to the temptation to deny. Finally the second he confessed is added to the first in order to attach it to the profession which follows. , i.e. I am not, etc., but there is One who is.

Joh. 1:21. Elias.Mal. 4:5-6. John came in the spirit and power of Elijah, it is true (Luk. 1:17); but according to the Jewish expectation of a literal return of the old prophet, the Baptist could return only a negative answer. That (the) prophet.Deu. 18:15. The interpretation of this old prophecy given in Act. 3:19-24 was evidently that held by John. Thus again he answered no.

Joh. 1:22-23.In his positive answer the Baptist appropriated to himself the grand prophecy of Isa. 40:3. Notice the agreement with the Synoptists, who all refer this prophecy to John (Mat. 3:3; Mar. 1:3; Luk. 3:3-6).

Joh. 1:24. And they had been sent from the Pharisees.The best MSS. omit the , but this does not alter the sense, as the messengers would no doubt be themselves Pharisees. The clause is inserted to explain the sequel.

Joh. 1:25.The Pharisees, versed in the law and tradition, were well acquainted with the meaning of the baptismal riteas, e.g., applied to proselytes. But why did John enforce it in the case of all, Jews as well as others, if he were not the Messiah, or Elias, whom they expected to enact a great national lustration to inaugurate the kingdom of Messiah (Godet)? Eze. 36:25-27; Zec. 13:1.

Joh. 1:26-27. I baptise, etc.This is the continuation of his call to repentance (Joh. 1:23, Make straight, etc.), as well as the answer to the question of the Pharisees. In the very fact that he announces to them the presence of the Messiah in the midst of them, their question is resolved. If the Christ is there He is known by him and him alone,the Messianic time has come; he is its initiator, and his baptism is thereby justified (Godet). Latchet, etc.The coming Messiah should be so glorious that John felt himself unworthy of serving Him in the most menial office. The phrase is wanting in the best MSS.

Joh. 1:28. In Bethabara should be read in Bethania, or Bethany beyond Jordan. The change of name from the Bethany of the oldest MSS. seems to have been effected by Origen. In his day the name had been obliterated from the region of the Jordan; but finding that tradition pointed to a place called Bethabara as that where John baptised, he inserted that name. But, according to Godet, As to the Bethany near the Jordan, it is more probable that its name is derived from Beth-Onijah (-navis), place of the ferry-boat. This last sense would almost coincide with that of Bethabara, place of the ford (Jdg. 7:24). Caspari identifies it with Tell (i.e. Beth sometimes is so translated in Arabic) Anihje, a village some miles north of the Sea of Galilee on the east side of Jordan. The conclusion of Godet and others (given above) is perhaps the most reasonable in view of all the facts of the case. There were two Bethanys, just as there were two Csareas, etc.

Joh. 1:31-33. I knew Him not also.John, though knowing that Jesus had some important work to do, and a lofty destiny far higher than his own, had not yet arrived at the knowledge of Him as the hope of Israel. The divine lineage and lofty mission of Jesus as the Messiah were not fully known to John until after that scene at Jordan, when the Spirit descended on the Saviour from heaven like a dove and abode upon Him. Then the Baptist knew by an express divine revelation that this was He who should baptise with the Spirit, that this was indeed The Son of God.

Joh. 1:34. And I saw and bare record (have seen, etc.).The perfects denote a completed fact. The meaning is not that Jesus became (was constituted) at His baptism the Son of God, but simply that this momentous truth was then revealed to John and testified to by him.

Joh. 1:35-37. Again (vide Joh. 1:29). Two of His disciples, etc.The minute details are interesting as showing how deep an impression this days events had made on the writer of this Gospel, who was one of the two mentioned.

(36) Looking on Jesus as He walked.Regarding Him with earnest gaze. Christ and the Baptist henceforward were each independently to carry on their individual work; but John was now to be guided by the action of Jesus. Like all men, John also must behold the Lamb of God.

(37) The disciples understand the words as the teacher meant them. There is no word bidding them follow Jesus; that cannot be needed (Watkins).

MAIN HOMILETICS OF THE PARAGRAPH.Joh. 1:19-37

The witness of John the Baptist.John the Baptist was aware that his preparatory ministry was nearing its close, that his prophetic ray would grow dim and fade away as the Sun of righteousness, now risen visibly on the world, shed abroad its heavenly light. The Baptist is a noble figure as he meets us in this Gospel, as he bears unfaltering witness to the Messiah, and directs his loved disciples to Jesus. His uprightness, candour, humility, boldness, and power form traits of a character that wins the esteem and admiration of all noble minds. Among them that are born of women there hath not risen a greater than John the Baptist (Mat. 11:11). But now his work was nearly doneand well done. Therefore like a modest herald he steps aside at the coming of the Prince whose way he had prepared. The witness of John is given in threefold form:

I. His testimony as to his own person and work.The Word was made flesh is the theme of the prologue to this Gospel. The witness of John that Jesus is the incarnate Word is the subject of this section.

1. The Evangelist had already referred to the witness of the Baptist (Joh. 1:6-8; Joh. 1:15), as the herald of the Messiah about to be revealed, when he preached repentance to those who flocked to his ministry and declared that the kingdom of the heavens was at hand (Joh. 1:15 : compare Mat. 3:1-3; Mat. 3:11). His preaching, which was with power, and his employment of the rite of baptism, which was to be a significant sign of the times of the Messiah (Eze. 36:25-27; Isa. 52:15; Zec. 13:1), made so deep an impression on all classes of the community, that all men mused in their hearts of John, whether he were the Christ, or not (Luk. 3:15). It was this circumstance which led to his first historical testimony to Christ recorded here. The religious rulers could not allow such events to transpire and such thoughts to spread without making strict inquiry as to Johns person and the meaning of his work. Therefore the Jews (under which designation we are to understand most probably the Sanhedrin, on which devolved the oversight of the religious teaching and worship of the people) sent priests and Levites from Jerusalem to ask him, Who art thou? (Joh. 1:19). By the Levites probably the scribes are meant (Neh. 8:7-8). As men versed in the law, they were sent to discover and define Johns position. All of them were members of the party of the Pharisees, the sect which laid the greatest stress on the outward observances of the law, and the greatest store by the traditions of the fathers. Thus we may expect that (as afterward in the case of Christ) they approached John the Baptist, if not as enemies, yet with no very friendly disposition.

2. Their question was a sign of the times. As in the human soul, when seeking after salvation, there may be, and usually is, a period of uncertainty, when the soul can find no rest, and looks hither and thither in order to find it, so at the time when Christ appeared men were anxiously looking for a Redeemer. Not only among the Jews, but even among the heathen, there was an expectation that a deliverer of the race was nigh at hand. But more especially was this the case among the Jews, groaning as they were under the yoke of subjection to Rome.

3. Pious Israelites, and even the formalists, were anxiously hoping that the promised hour was near (Luk. 2:25; Luk. 2:38). And as they heard of Johns preaching, of the crowds that were drawn to his baptism, and of the revival of religion that was proceeding under his startling calls to repentance, it was little wonder that the people were in expectation (Luk. 3:15). It was certainly time to ask John publicly, Who art thou?

4. There was no delay or hesitation in the Baptists answer. That is the meaning of the words, He confessed, and denied not. His confession was open and prompt, without dubiety. Without arrire pense, without any thought of his own honour or self-advantage, he unhesitatingly repudiated any claim to be the Messiah, as he doubtless realised that this definite question lingered behind the general one.

5. Satisfied on this point, the deputation then endeavoured to discover something concerning John himself. Art thou Elias? is the next question. And the Baptists answer is, I am not, i.e. not Elias in person, according to your expectation. Art thou that prophet? i.e. that prophet foretold by Moses (Deu. 18:15; Deu. 18:18). And John answered, No, as if by this brevity he would signify that he did not desire them to linger on the subject of own personality. Then in response to their further demand that he would positively declare who he was, he answered, I am the voice, etc. Of himself he would not speak further: his office, and not himself, to him was most important. He desired to draw attention away from himself, so as to concentrate it on the Messiah. Therefore he described himself as the voice crying in the wilderness spoken of by Isaiah (Isa. 40:3), to prepare the way of the Messiah. A man becomes a voice when he desires nothing for himself, when he does not consider himself, but when his message is everything (Luther). The wilderness was a fitting image of the moral condition of his people, whose hearts needed to be prepared for the Lord (Luk. 1:16-18; Luk. 1:76) by true repentance.

6. In the next question the true character of the messengers of the Jewish religious leaders shows itself. They were zealous in a way for the law, but they were even more so for their traditions. Why baptisest thou with water? etc. They knew that before the days of the Messiah there should be a cleansing of the people (vide above, Eze. 36:25, etc.); but if John were not the Messiah, nor one of the prophets who should precede Him, what right had he to presume to use that symbolic rite? This question led to the testimony the Baptist was so desirous to make: I baptise with water, etc. (Joh. 1:26-27). You ask me for my authority to baptise: it is my right and duty in the office committed to me. I must prepare the way of the Lord; and to this end I preach repentance and baptise, i.e. prepare those who shall receive the Messiah. And this is so much more needful, as the Messiah no longer delays His coming, but even now stands among you, i.e. has already begun His public ministry in Israel. Thus in the lofty position of Him whose forerunner John was, in the necessity of the forsaking of sin as a preparation for His coming, lay Johns authority for his baptism.

II. Johns testimony in the presence of Jesus.

1. John confessed that he had not recognised the high destiny of Jesus, but only the fact that He should be made manifest to Israel. This does not mean that John was unacquainted with Jesus personally. Probably he had heard something of the marvellous circumstances attending the birth of Jesus, and the expectations raised by these circumstances in pious hearts. But that He who at Nazareth appeared in such humble guise in the form of a servant should be the promised Messiah was far from Johns thought.

2. A fuller revelation dawned on him at the baptism of the Redeemer. He who was formerly known only as the son of Joseph was now revealed as the Son of God. He whom the Baptist saw as One so pure and true as to need no cleansing, nor therefore the symbolic sign of cleansing, was now revealed as He who should baptise with the Holy Ghost. Johns baptism, like the Old Testament offerings, was intimately related to the forgiveness of sin. And as the offerer was purged from sin by looking in faith toward what those offerings symbolised, so those who received Johns baptism in faith as a preparation for the coming of Gods kingdom participated in that forgiveness which membership in that kingdom implies. But, like the Old Testament offerings, this baptism was typical and temporary. It could not confer that spiritual life by which renewed men are enabled to mortify the deeds of the body (Rom. 8:13). And it was revealed to John at Christs baptism that He it was who should baptise with the Holy Ghost. And therefore John was now prepared to testify, as he did, that

3. Christ is the Lamb of God, etc.the Son of Godthe Messiah of Israel. But why was it necessary that the Spirit should descend on the Redeemer at His baptism? Was He not the eternal Son? Did not the fulness of the Godhead bodily dwell in Him? Was He not conceived of the Holy Ghost? Yet it is said, God giveth not the Spirit by measure unto Him. The meaning seems to be that our Lords humanity needed this preparation, this bestowal of the Holy Spirit, for its high office. God was manifested in the flesh, justified in the spirit (1Ti. 3:16).

III. Johns testimony to Jesus among his disciples.

1. When John saw Jesus coming as conqueror from the wilderness conflict he had pointed Him out as the Lamb of God to all who heard him speak. On the following day he directed his disciples especially to this heavenly Teacher and Redeemer, to bear witness to whom was now his high office and his deepest joy.
2. Apparently John prompted his disciples to follow the Saviour. His words, Behold the Lamb of God, would be to them equivalent to a command to go after Him.

Learn, preachers and teachers:

1. To lose sight of self in witnessing for Christ;

2. To be open and bold in confessing Christ;
3. To rejoice in being able to direct others to the Saviour.

Joh. 1:22. Who art thou? (A Christmas Homily.)We consider this question

I. As a question put to ourselves.The Saviour has been born. God became man. Then comes the question, O God, what am I that Thou shouldst give Thy Son for me? Some give to this question

1. No reply.John gave a reply; we seek to back out of it. Who art thou? This is no police inquiry what you are in the world, and how much you are worth. It is a question of conscience to our hearts. Conscience seeks to know how we stand toward God. Your possessions, the duties of your office, the newest form of entertainment, political news, etc., you know; but to your own heart you are a stranger. You do not venture to look into it, it is so unpleasant to do so. So you seek to hear not, or to ignore this question, Who art thou? and are silent. But your silence is also an answer.

2. A vain-glorious answer.John gave a humble answer; you an answer of self-commendation. You can look the question boldly in the face. You fulfil what is incumbent on you; you envelop yourself in the cloak of your good name as a citizen. You measure yourself complacently with others. You know nothing of a troubled conscience, and you have nothing to seek for at the manger-cradle of the Son of God.

3. An embarrassed and undetermined answer.John gave a definite and clear answer; you give a doubtful one. You hear the question plainly, Who art thou? Are you already converted? Are you a child of God, a member of Christ? Can you die assured? But you seek to shun the question; you give an embarrassed and undetermined answer.

4. An honest answer.There are those who answer faithfully. Their answer is a troubled one, and runs, I am a sinner. And it brings the troubled soul to the Saviour. Or their answer is a plaintive one, for they sigh for the comfort of grace, and have it not yet. Therefore they cry out, It is for Thee I sigh; comfort Thou my heart. Or their answer is a joyful one, and runs, I am a sinner, but I have found grace. Christ is born for me.

II. As a question put concerning the Lord.Men turn aside from the question, Who art thou? They do not know themselves, and therefore they do not know the Lord. They know not the meaning of Christian joy. But those who seek to answer the question go to the manger-bed and ask, Who is this Child? Of Him our gospel says:

1. He is so near, and is yet so far above us.He has come into your midst, Him whom ye knew not. This is true now as then.

2. He is so high, and yet so lowly.He who comes after me is preferred before me. He is God from eternity, and yet has appeared in time, and lies as an infant of days in His manger-bed.

3. He is so holy, and yet so full of grace.He it is the latchet of whose shoes I am not worthy to stoop down and unloose. We are not worthy tremblingly to offer Him the lowliest service; and yet He appears as the Lamb of God who beareth away the sins of the world.Appuhn, in J. L. Sommer.

Joh. 1:27. Christs disciples follow Him.I. Christs disciples follow Him as their Redeemer. This is the first and chiefest reason why we should go after Him.

1. It is good to be attracted to Him for any reason; but all will be useless unless we recognise and act upon the great need of our nature, and the promise that it will be granted, which is discovered in the very name of the Saviour: He shall be called Jesus, for He shall save His people from their sins. And men must come to Him for this eternally important and all-inclusive blessing of redemption. Otherwise they cannot truly follow Him in any fashion. The prisoner manacled and fettered in his cell cannot walk on the highway, however eagerly he may desire to do so. His chains and fetters must be taken off, and he must come forth from his cell a free man first. Now by nature we are bound by sin, enslaved by sin; and ere we can follow Jesus to any good purpose we must be delivered.

2. But how can we attain deliverance and follow Christ if we are bound and fettered? Here is the grace and simplicity of the gospel. When men feel their need, and desire deliverance truly and sincerely, in that very moment the fetters are broken, and they are enabled to go to the Redeemer for pardon, peace, and every heavenly gift. Whosoever will, let him take of the water of life freely (Rev. 22:17). He hath lifted up and borne away the sin of the world (Joh. 1:29); He hath borne our sins in His own body on the tree (1Pe. 2:24); He was wounded for our transgressions and bruised for our iniquities (Isa. 53:5). He hath taken away the guilt of our sin.

3. But more than thatif we follow Him as our redeemer He enables us to die unto sin. We are delivered from the power of that baleful disorder which has laid hold of our humanity, from the grip of that subtle foe that seeks our undoing. How miserable has this foe made earnest men who have tried to free themselves from his power! Again and again they have wrestled and striven, only to fall yet once more before his onslaught. And, on the other hand, how blessed is the experience of those who have felt their own impotence, have looked to Christ for deliverance, and of whom it can be said: Sin shall have no more dominion over you; for ye are not under the law, but under grace (Rom. 6:14).

4. And thus do Christs disciples attain to peace. The old terror of God passes away, as they see sins guilt removed at the cross; the old misery and wretchedness in the ineffectual strife with the power of sin is banished when Christ frees them from their bondage. Then peace and joy and unfading hope fill their souls. Old-fashioned and simple teaching? Yes; but ever fresh and welcome to those who receive and act upon it. Consequently it is of supreme importance as a test for ourselves to ask: Have all we obeyed the earnest exhortations of faithful preachers of the cross? Have we, like Johns disciples, followed Jesus, and is the full blessedness of redemption ours?

II. Christs disciples follow Him as their pattern.To do this aright is impossible until we have learned to follow Him as the Redeemer. Hence there are many who profess to follow Him, by taking Him as their example, who in reality go astray at the very first step. They overlook the essential purpose for which Gods Son became incarnate, and for which He calls men to Him: Look unto Me and be ye saved, all ye ends of the earth. But when this first step has been made, then we are to follow Christ as our heavenly pattern.

1. Men need such a patternone who in human form would reveal and exemplify the life and walk of the perfect man, according to the heavenly ideal. Such was never seen in human lifeat least after the fall. Men could not know or understand the perfect human life, which is summed up in the phrase walking with God, until it was revealed in Christ. Nothing remained but the mystic and brief record of that primval period of Edenic blessedness, ere sin entered the world. And afterward, although in some hearts still the desire for heavenly communion so prevailed that of an Enoch and a Noah it was said that they walked with God, yet this brief record also implies and records the presence of imperfection. There were flawsIn much the best life faileth.
2. But all men, as we have seen, conform their lives to one pattern or another. The child imitates the parent; the friend is influenced by the more powerful personality, the genius, the amiability, the intelligence of some dearly loved friend. We are influenced, often insensibly, by one conspicuous in the religious, the social, the political sphere. Hence the need of choosing as our patterns those influenced by principles of righteousness. Hence, also, the need of all those who are professedly Christs followers, and who have their influence in greater or less degree as parents, friends, public men, to see that their influence is for goodthat in this they are imitators of Christ.
3. But it is well, above all, that we should daily look to that perfect pattern in whose steps we are commanded to follow, to that sacred height of holiness toward which we are to climb.
(1) We are to follow Him in His willing obedience to the Father. He was obedient unto death, even. No murmur escaped His lips, however bitter the cup, however painful and shameful the cross. A cheerful compliance with all that must needs be done was the conspicuous feature of His life. In His prophetic word, ages before His incarnation, He declared: Lo, I come; in the volume of the book it is written of Me, I delight to do Thy will, O My God; yea, Thy law is within My heart (Psa. 40:7-8). And when He did assume the lowly guise of a servant on earth, it was to reaffirm that word: My meat is to do the will of Him that sent Me, and to finish His work (Joh. 4:34). And this is the spirit in which all true sons of God will seek to serve the heavenly Father.

(2) He is our pattern also in His patient endurance in love and activity for men. Who, of all who have lived, has kept perfectly the second great commandment of the law but Christ?

(3) And we are to follow Him also in His victorious conquest of evil. From the hour when the vanquished adversary retired foiled from the mountain top, until on the cross the Saviour cried It is finished, the powers of evil sought to conquer Him in vain. In vain! for the resurrection morning proclaimed them vanquished for ever.

(4) In this way must we follow Christon the path of obedience, in the way of the service of humanity, in the conquest of eviland we shall be more than conquerors through Him who loved us (Rom. 8:37).

III. Through Him who loved us. This leads to the further thought that we are to follow Christ as our guide and shepherd. Christ our pattern of attainment! Is it not to us an impossible one? Yes, but for His promise, Lo, I am with you always. Therein lies our hope.

1. He is our guide.Without an experienced guide even skilled mountaineers will not attempt to scale giddy Alpine peaks; and even such skilled guides may err, so that guide and traveller may rush to death. But our heavenly Guide never errsHe is unfailing. His hold is never relinquishedno blinding storm, nor slippery path, nor yawning crevasse can daunt or stay Him. And those who trust Him He will safely guide on the perilous path of life, until they rest on the summit in the serene sunshine of heaven, far above the storms and clouds of earth.

2. But more comforting still is the assurance that He is the shepherd of His people. We need not only a guide for the upward pathwe need to be strengthened and refreshed for the way. And His people find all needed nourishment in the green pastures of His word and gospel, whereby their souls are strengthened for the journey; whilst there is continual refreshing for them in the waterbrooks of grace. He strengthens them to resist their spiritual foes: in temptations dangerous hour He stands near to help them; when the wolfthe enemy of God and mandraws near to steal, kill, destroy, and His flock look to Him for aid, He will not be afar; when they must pass through the darkness of death He shines as their example, comforts with His rod and staff, and at eventide brings them safely folded into the greener pastures of paradise, and the waterbrooks of everlasting life.

Joh. 1:29. The Lamb of God.Johns action here shows (Joh. 1:19-27) how faithful he was in his office as forerunner of the Messiah. It was not his own influence, honour, glory, he thought upon. Having recognised in Jesus his Lord and the promised Deliverer, he pointed his disciples to Him, contented that his preparatory work should come to an end, that his influence should wane whilst that of Jesus waxed, that as the herald of the dawn he should fade from view at the rising of the Sun of righteousness.

I. What is the meaning of this title, the Lamb of God?What would Johns hearers understand by those words? One common idea is that they refer to the passover lamb. No doubt this in a sense is true. The sprinkling of His blood is a sign of safety to the redeemed. But this is not the only meaning. The reference is in greater measure to the lamb of the trespass offering (Lev. 4:32-35; Lev. 14:12-14, etc.). The image brought before a Jewish mind by this descriptive title would be the sacrifices offered in a special sense for sinmore particularly, perhaps, the lamb of the daily morning and evening sacrifice. It would call to mind the ascending altar smoke, rising like a prayer for forgiveness, and the typical sacrifices ever pointing forward to One who was to complete and end them all. Especially would they be reminded of that prophetic picture of the Messiah in which He is represented thus: He is brought as a lamb to the slaughter, etc. (Isa. 53:7). Now it is in this sense chiefly that men are called upon to behold the Lamb of God. He is the great atonement for sin, for His atoning work is potent to take away the guilt of sin and free men from its curse. It is sufficient here to point out that this word is in agreement with the leading idea of the New Testament when it speaks of Christ bearing away the worlds sin. The full force of the word () is to lift up as a burden and carry awaythe meaning being that Jesus lifted up the burden and penalty of sin from believers, Himself bearing the penalty for them. This was done by expiationby rendering satisfaction for the breaking and outraging of Gods law through sin. Nothing less could bring peace; and Christ brings peace by removing the guilt of sin. Surely He hath borne, etc. (Isa. 53:4-5). Thus the Old Testament seer spoke of the coming Messiah. And when He had completed His work on earth, the New Testament writers speak of that work thus: It behoved Christ to suffer, etc. (Luk. 24:26); The blood of Jesus Christ cleanseth from all sin (1Jn. 1:7); Christ appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself (Heb. 9:26). Such words testify plainly as to the nature of Christs redemptive work. His sacrificial death accomplished what the typical sacrifice of the old covenant pointed to. He shed His blood for the remission of sin (Mat. 26:28). Make of it what men may, this is a cardinal doctrine of Scripture. God hath set Him forth, etc. (Rom. 3:25). There is an experimental proof of the truth of this doctrine which to believers is irrefragable. It is the fact that those who truly have faith in Christ know the blessedness that springs from forgiven sin. Does it form a firm foundation for our Christian hope? They who have this proof need no other that Christ is the Lamb of God.

II. Whilst the foregoing is the primary sense of the text, and that which would first occur to Johns Jewish hearers, there is another sense in which it appeals to the Christian. Christ is here held up as the example we must follow if we would be free from sin and grow in holiness. His disposition and life are held up for our imitation. The redeeming work and power of Christ are many-sideda truth often forgotten in disputes as to the meaning of the Atonement.

1. In this descriptive title there is an intimation of the gentleness of Christs character. He never did nor will quench the smoking flax, etc. He never did nor will spurn true penitents, how great soever their sin and guilt. He wore no forbidding aspect, did not display the fulness of His power in wrath. The mild rays of love and mercy shone in all His life. Tender acts, gentle words, showed what forces moved His matchless life. He was ever willing to sheathe the sword of justice and stretch out a helping hand to erring men if they would cease their rebellion. He felt for weak humanity, sorrowed with men and women in their trials, rejoiced with them in their innocent joys, tenderly loved little children, bore compassionately with the waywardness of children of a larger growth. He was meek and lowlythe Lamb of God. True, there were not wanting elements of divine strength from His characteranger at sin, scorn of evil (Matthew 23, etc.). But He showed this only when gentleness, even divine, would not reclaim, and divine indignation must needs show itself. Still, this was exceptional. And so, too, exalted in the heavens, the same tender compassion characterises Him. He will yet, no doubt, speak in judgment, and terrible will be the wrath of the Lamb. But His nature and His name is love, and with tender entreaty He invites men to look to Him and live.

2. The purity and sinlessness of Jesus are suggested by the title of the text. He was as a lamb without blemish and without spot (1Pe. 1:19), the true sacrificial antitype. His life all through was beautiful, pure, true. There was about it that which made wicked men shrink from it as darkness from light. As the pellucid flood reflects the blue heaven, so the pure human life of Jesus reflected as in a mirror the purity and holiness of heaven. His lynx-eyed enemies could not disprove His innocence; at His trial hired witnesses had to be set up to accuse Him, as no honest man could be found to speak an accusing word. Pilate had to confess, This man hath done nothing amiss. So He stands before the world gentle and tender, pure and innocentthe Lamb of God.

3. And by this display of character and life Jesus Christ is in a true and genuine sense taking away the sin of the world. Not only does His sacrifice free men from the guilt of sinthrough faith in Him the heart is endowed with a new spiritual power by which the believer overcomes the world. Yet this would not be sufficient were there no example for the Christian to follow, and some goal pointed out toward which he may strive. But there is such an example and such a goal. Christ is our example, and calls us to follow Him, the perfect man, bending down to us from the height of holiness toward which we are to strive to attain. His example and His invitations are like an immense magnet force drawing men, when they submit to its power, nearer to itself. The more men become familiar with Christs character, the more will they be dissatisfied with themselves and with sin, the more attracted to holiness and the divine service.

III. Attend therefore to the exhortation of the Baptist.Behold, etc. Men must do so whether they will or no. Toward Him all eyes in the civilised world are directed. Even His enemies cannot help themselves. To ignore Him would be to ignore the luminous centre of a dark world. Behold Him! ye who have not yet trusted in Him. You have tasted of sins bitterness, felt its misery, have trembled at the thought of death and eternity. You feel it is a curse in the happiness of being. But there is one power can burst asunder the fetters of evil, can purify and bless. It is Christs gospel. Behold the Lamb of God! in simple faith accept Him, and the blessedness of pardon will visit your sin-sick nature like a healing balm, and peace like restful eventide will descend upon your souls. In vain will the like result be sought in other ways. Try this way! Behold Him, Christians! and let the view animate your souls and stir you to greater efforts to attain. The conflict between good and evil is fierce and protracted. Take your stand beside the cross. Let not men say your example was such that, if you were representative Christians, they could see no great hope of a higher life or any great profit in passing to the position in which you profess to stand. Follow the Lords example: Let your profiting appear unto all men. Remember how unweariedly He toiled and endured for you amidst danger and in temptation. Therefore be not weary in well-doing, and let your hands be quick to good. See Him and become Christlike; let His loving character be reproduced in your lives. For if men do not behold Him earnestly and lovingly in the day of life, a time will come when they shall not be able to choose. Behold, He cometh with clouds, and every eye shall see Him (Rev. 1:7)comes no more with messages of peace, but awful as the Judge of quick and dead. May it be ours to labour diligently now as His disciples and servants, so that we may joyfully look for His appearing, and join the mighty host of the redeemed whom John in vision heard saying, Worthy is the Lamb that was slain, etc. (Rev. 5:12). And till then may we raise that prayer which has ascended since the Church was founded in many a stormy time, and which still ascends: Agnus Dei, qui tollis peccata mundi, miserere nobis: Agnus Dei, qui tollis peccata mundi, dona nobis pacem. Amen.

Joh. 1:29-34. The result of beholding Christ in faith as the Lamb of God.In view of all that Christ is, of all His greatness and glory, of all His love and condescension, what position should we assume toward Him? When we remember that not only does He bring us salvation, but that He is governing and controlling all things, coming in His judgments among the nations and individuals, until He shall come at last in His glory, it well becomes us to ask: How are we receiving Him? Is He coming to us in love and mercy, and are we rejoicing in Him? There can be joy to those alone to whom the coming of Christ signifies grace and not judgment. Do we believe Him to be what the Scriptures declare He is? Then it will be the part of true wisdom to ask how we stand related to Him. All things, all created beings, were created by Him and for Him (Col. 1:16). What then is our duty?

I. We should submit ourselves willingly to His rule.

1. When the King of kings makes His presence felt, we should receive Him with honour and reverence, and prepare ourselves for His service. At His advent as the incarnate Son it was foretold that His forerunner should go before Him in the spirit and power of Elias to make ready a people prepared for the Lord (Luk. 1:17). And the forerunner declared that he himself was the voice of one crying, etc. (Joh. 1:23).

2. Therefore we should prepare our hearts to receive Christ, by repentance of sin and turning away from itPrepare the way of the Lord and make His paths straight (Mat. 3:2-3). So we must humble ourselves before Him, remembering our sins, through His grace turn from sin and submit ourselves to Him, to be freed from spiritual bondage, and made free citizens of His spiritual kingdomfellow-citizens of the saints and of the household of God.

3. And receiving Christ thus, we shall reach true joy and peace in life; for then we shall be occupying our true position as subjects of our King and as creatures of our Creator. Duty and destiny are both then clear and plain. Doubt as to the one and darkness as regards the other vanish away.
4. Let us submit ourselves to our Maker and King then, for in this way alone do we attain our true position in time and our true hope for eternity. But we must also do so in adoring gratitude when we remember His love and mercythat He the Son and Word of God became man, emptied Himself of His glory, suffered and died that we might live. When we have thus submitted ourselves, then

II. We should labour for Him.

1. The true and loyal citizen of a country delights to spend and be spent in the service of country and ruler. The statesman spends laborious days and nights, often for a lifetime, without fee or reward, in the service of his fatherland. The philanthropist, in his enthusiasm for humanity; gives himself up to his benevolent labours, not only without a grudge, but with positive pleasure, finding in well-doing and in blessing others the highest reward.
2. Do not such examples put many of those called Christians to confusion? Are not those who profess that they believe in Christ citizens of a kingdom far more grand and glorious than the most glorious dominion that the world has ever seen? Are they not subjects of the King of kings and Lord of lords, the Creator and Governor of all, who also when His subjects rebelled was made flesh, in order that He might bring them back from their alienation?
3. And yet how feebly and haltingly do they serve Him and labour for Him, and the building up and extension of His kingdom! But His true subjects make this their continual aim. Even in what is erroneously called their secular labour, they will be ever seeking to do His will and work. The glory of Christ and His kingdom will be the one aim of life to them. It is the true aim of men, and leads to the best and most blessed end, if men would but see this. When we have attained to being workers together with Christ, then

III. We should bear witness to Him.

1. This Christs forerunner did (Joh. 1:15). This is a distinctive mark of true subjects of Christ. Ye shall be witnesses unto Me both in Jerusalem, etc. (Act. 1:8).

2. They should bear witness by their righteous, joyful lives, showing in this way, unto all men, whose they are and whom they serve, attracting men to the kingdom by their radiant Christian character (Mat. 5:16; 1Th. 1:8).

3. They should witness for Him in word, rebuking what is evil in His name (Luk. 3:7-9), and pointing to Him as the way of salvation (Luk. 3:16-18), testifying from experience what He has done for their souls.

4. Nor must their testimony end with their immediate surroundings. To every true Christian man and woman is given the promise, Ye shall be My witnesses unto the uttermost part of the earth. Each cannot do this personally. But when the Church at Philippi is filled with the Spirit of Christ, then it will be eager to uphold and aid the missionary apostle to bear the truth, that has blessed them, to those wandering in error (Php. 4:14)to bring the light of salvation, which has arisen on them, making their hearts glad, to those who are still in spiritual darkness. True citizens of the spiritual kingdom should need no persuasion to invite them to missionary effort.

HOMILETIC NOTES

Joh. 1:19-38. Who art thou, journalist with far-heard speaking-trumpet of thy newspaper? thou poet or literary man? thou preacher in the pulpit or speaker on the political platform? Will you allow yourself to be addressed generally in regard to your prophetic calling, as the Baptist was spoken to, as to whether you use your calling on the basis of self-knowledge and self-denial? Do you know what your dangers are, and the weak points in your armour? Are you venal like the prophet Balaam, or incorruptible like Simon Peter in presence of the sorcerer? Are you fearful like Jonah, or undismayed like Nathan? Do you, like Saul, even when he was by chance found among the prophets, hold fast to the old evil Ego, or are you personally consecrated to God as was that other Saul when he became Paul? A consecrated voice of to-day speaks in wrath against all the egoistic and selfish doings of blatant popular orators: They frequently rave about freedom whilst all the time the slaves of their own lusts; they speak about the eternal rights of man, and mean only their own little ego! What do you say of yourself? no matter whether you are surrounded by the madding crowd, or by silent loneliness; whether men weave thorns or laurels for your crown; whether the one side seek to pamper, or the other to scoff you? Are you as wholesomely distrustful of yourself as was Paul, who not only thought lightly of mans judgment, but in view of the possibility of being self-deceived declared: Yea, I judge not mine own self: it is God who judgeth me (1Co. 4:3). Do you confess and deny not: I am not my own Christ; as the hart panteth after the waterbrooks, so crieth and thirsteth my soul for Him who is full of grace and truthfull of forgiveness and salvation? Do you confess and deny not: I am of unclean lips, and need the expiating call from above? This is indeed the distinction, frequently overlooked, between simple modesty and Christian humility,that modesty is a gracious adornment, humility a religious virtue; that modesty has learned the limits of individual knowledge and ability, humility, on the contrary, the feeling of sinfulness and misery; that modesty thinks it sufficient not to intrude ones self and strut vainly before men, whilst humility bends the knee before the all-holy God. Thinking of ones self too highlythis is the mildew on the sowing of the preacher, the poison on the pen of the author, the rust upon the harp of the poet. Wherefore sings a noble singer: And were my song, waiting for the worlds favour, to court the reward of vanity, then should I dash my harp to pieces, and shuddering be silent eternally before Thee. In the kingdom of God the prophet discovers his true relation to Christ, to his fellow-labourers, to his people, as well as a true activity, only when he lets the night of his Ego become ever shorter, and the day of the great spiritual Sun ever longer, in his life: He must increase, but I must decrease.Dr. R. Kgel.

Joh. 1:19-37. The world is weary with its cumbrous and futile methods of obtaining deliverance from sin.Consciousness of moral law, and the ever-growing conviction of the comprehensiveness and inflexibility of the physical and mental consequences of actions, deepen the harrowing sense of moral evil, fasten on the transgressor the Nessus-shirt of fire, from which in this nineteenth century, as well as in the first, he struggles hard to be free. The sin of the world is even now revealed with awful distinctness to some minds. It is not necessary to go to the cell of the anchorite, where some child of superstition is combating those phantoms of despair which are conjured up by excited brain and morbid tradition. Nor is it requisite to follow the explorer or the missionary into haunts of vice and homes of cruelty, where bold badness deliberately crushes broken hearts and blasphemes Heaven. It is scarcely needful to lift the thin veil of poor excuse and preposterous flattery with which a flimsy philosophy conceals the evil. The grim, gaunt forms of sin loom through the veil, and the fear of men is not hushed by being told that they should be virtuous and calm, that evil is an accident and responsibility a dream. Naturethe word being used as another name for Godmay be very beautiful in her glowing sunrise, and fascinating when the light and the mist conceal very much from view; but Nature, bearing man in her bosom, and evolving him, sin and all, out of her eternal depths, without any interference of God or devil, is very ghastly and terrible. Under this awful vision, the hearts of thousands have been hurried, crushed and blaspheming, into the darkness. The sin of the world, in its individual forms and its terrible aggregate, presses upon conscience as a fault and a removable evil. Hence its awful burden. From this springs the whole history of sacrifices and atonements. If sin is to be taken away from the world, the twofold process of redemption and renewal must be involved in the Acts 1. The conscience must be assured that the law has not been trifled with; that it is safe and right to believe in God as able to save, ready to forgive, waiting to bless; that the universal voice of nature has failed to speak all the truth; that a Fathers heart pulsates behind the eternal laws; that He has revealed Himself, in a higher form than nature can ever approach, through a human life which still towers above the loftiest evolution of humanity; that Holy Love is at the heart of the universe; that Grace will reign through righteousness unto eternal life! But,

2. More than this, the sin itself, as well as all its natural consequences, must be expelled from the individual and the aggregate. There must be the new life, as well as the new relationship with God.Dr. H. R. Reynolds.

ILLUSTRATION

Joh. 1:29. Permanent convictions.John found no greater word to describe the glory of the noon than that through which he had seen the dawn. It was the same light in its zenith as when it first greeted him through the mist. Surely it is worth while to investigate a revelation like this, which was as much to the aged seer as it was to the young fisherman. How beautiful is a life of which the early days, the middle, and the latest hold the same convictions, only growing with the mans growth, and widening with his experience. How beautiful when the life is based on truths which no experience can overthrow, which experience only renders more precious; and how different from the lives of men who flit restlessly from one faith to another, and find no abiding home. It is beautiful when we see the father and the young man and the child bound together by the faith which goes through all the stages of life, the end circling round the beginning, only with a deeper conviction and a stronger love at last. To understand the meaning of this profound phrase we must go back to the Old Testament, in which the mind of him who first uttered it was steeped. Perhaps the passage which was most clearly before him as he spoke was that in the climax of evangelical prophecy where Jesus is described as a Lamb led to the slaughter, and where it is said that as a sheep before his shearers is dumb, so He opened not His mouth. Forty days before Christ had been baptised, and in the interval John had no doubt been meditating deeply on the prophecies that announced the Messiah; and this would stand more clearly before his mind than any. Besides, through those days and before them, he had been hearing countless stories of grief and sin from those who came to be baptised of him; and would he not think of One into whose ear sorrow would never be sobbed in vainOne who was to deal with sin adequately and finally by taking it away? He was wounded for our transgressions, He was bruised for our iniquities, the chastisement of our peace was upon Him, and with His stripes we are healed. But along with this we must include a reference to the Paschal Lamb. Few thoughts in Johns Gospel are more distinct than that of the relation of Jesus Christ to the Paschal sacrifice and feast. The Passover, which was the most conspicuous symbol of the Messianic deliverance, was not far off; flocks of lambs were passing by to Jerusalem to be offered at the coming feast, and the sight may have brought home the thought. Further, there is no difficulty in believing that the forerunner, who had deeply meditated the Messianic prophecies and the meaning of the sacrifices, saw, with prophetic insight, that Christ was to suffer, thus standing for a time on a higher level than any of the disciples.Dr. W. R. Nicoll.

Fuente: The Preacher’s Complete Homiletical Commentary Edited by Joseph S. Exell

THE JEWS INVESTIGATE JOHNS IDENTITY

Text 1:19-22

19

And this is the witness of John, when the Jews sent unto him from Jerusalem priests and Levites to ask him, who art thou?

20

And he confessed, and denied not; and he confessed, I am not the Christ.

21

And they asked him, What then? Art thou Elijah? And he saith, I am not. Art thou the prophet? And he answered, No.

22

They said therefore unto him, Who art thou? that we may give answer to them that sent us. What sayest thou of thyself?

Queries

a.

What are Levites?

b.

Why ask John the Baptist about Elijah and the prophet?

c.

Why would the committee need an answer?

Paraphrase

Now this is what John testified, when the Jewish Sanhedrin sent priests and Levites to John to obtain an answer from him concerning his identity, and they asked him, Who are you? And John vigorously and fully declared, I am not the Christ. Then they asked him, What then is the case? Are you Elijah? And he said, I am not Elijah as you look for him, Are you the prophet like unto Moses? And he answered, No! Then they said to him, Tell us then just who you are, for we must have an answer to take back to them that sent us. Tell us, what do you say about yourself?

Summary

The Jewish leaders demand to know whether John the Baptist is the Messiah, Elijah or the prophet. John denies all three identities.

Comment

The Sanhedrin, largely controlled by the Pharisees, was the religious authority of that day. It was a council of 70 or 71 learned and influential religious leaders. The council was a mixture of Pharisees (strict law-keeperstraditionalists), Sadducees (skeptics, worldly, politicians), and Scribes (interpreters, lawyers). In the committee that was investigating John there were also Levites. The Levites were a sort of secondary priesthood. They performed the more menial tasks of the temple service, baking bread, leading temple music, etc. One of their main functions was to enforce the Law. They were the temple police force, and they carried out the sentences of the Sanhedrin when punishment was to be inflicted.

This great, magnetic, eccentric character was attracting multitudes. Crowds were trekking into the wilderness just to hear him preach. The whole nation was on tiptoe expectation because of his powerful message (Luk. 3:15). Thus the rulers of the Jews felt they must take this matter in hand before certain religious and political repercussions occurred. There had been certain religious fanatics before who claimed to be the Messiah (cf. Act. 5:36-37). These had mustered a small force of followers and revolted against their conquerors, only to suffer disastrous results to themselves and the nation at large. A revolt now, touched off by John the Baptist against Rome, would be disastrous. The Sanhedrin might be deposed! In fact, some of them might even loose their heads! This is what Caiaphas had reference to when he said of Christ, it was expedient that one man should die for the people (Joh. 18:14). Basically, this is why the rulers crucified Jesus. They feared that the popularity of Jesus might cause revolt and subsequent Roman intervention (Joh. 11:48). They would lose their hold on the nations purse strings.

In addition to the fear of revolt, the rulers were interested in questioning John because of his frankness. He had said some very candid and revealing things about Pharisees and Sadducees (Mat. 3:7). Sending the Levites along indicates this committee would stand for no more attacks upon the character of the illustrious Doctors of Divinity of that day.

So they began their questioning by asking him if he was the Messiah. John emphatically stated that he was not the Messiah. The word used for confess in Joh. 1:20 is homologeo which literally means to speak the same thing; to agree. Thus Johns denial that he was the Christ was in perfect agreement with the truth. When we learn that we must confess Christ in order to be saved (Mat. 10:32-33), it means that our lives and our words must speak the same things, or agree with, the commandments of the Lord (cf. Rom. 10:9-10). To confess Christ is not the mere mouthing of Scripture, formula or creed, but a profession by both word and action 1 (cf. Jas. 1:22; 1Jn. 3:17-18).

What a man of God this John was! He willingly and joyfully kept himself in the background in order that all might see the only Son of God. The Baptist was what every true follower of Christ ought to bea servant willing to lay all the acclaim and honor given him of men at the feet of Jesus.

If you are not the Messiah, then you must be Elijah! This was the next conclusion of the investigating committee. The Jews had a tradition that Elijah was to precede the Messiah and that he, Elijah returned in the flesh, was to set all matters aright. He was even to settle disputes between property owners and money lenders. They taught that anything disputed must wait until Elijah comes. Of course, this is merely tradition, but is probably based on Mal. 4:5. They expected a literal, flesh-and blood Elijah to come and prepare the way for the Messiah. Therefore, Johns denial here does not contradict Mat. 11:14; Mat. 17:9-13, or Luk. 1:17, where John the Baptist is said to have come in the spirit and the power of Elijah.

COMPARISON OF JOHN THE BAPTIST AND ELIJAH

Elijah

John

1.

Place of abode

Hide thyself by the brook (1Ki. 17:3).

In deserts (Mat. 3:1).

2.

Food

Ravens fed him (1Ki. 17:6).

Locusts and wild honey (Mat. 3:4).

3.

Appearance

Hairy man (2Ki. 1:8).

Raiment of camels hair (Mat. 3:4).

4.

Message

Calamity to nation; call to Repentance (1Ki. 18:39).

Judgment to come; call to Repentance (Mat. 3:4).

5.

Influence Over Multitudes

Personality tremendous and compelling (1Ki. 18:1-46).

Brought whole nation into wilderness (Mat. 3:5; Luk. 3:15).

6.

Firey wrath on Enemies of True Religion

(1Ki. 18:40).

(Mat. 3:7).

7.

In the presence of Kings

Ahab and Jezebel (1Ki. 21:19).

Herod and Herodias (Mat. 14:4).

8.

Rage of an Evil Woman

Jezebel (1Ki. 19:2).

Herodias (Mat. 14:5-8).

9.

The Dark Hour

(1Ki. 19:4).

(Mat. 11:2).

10.

Extraordinary End of Career

(2Ki. 2:11).

(Mat. 14:11).

11.

Loyalty of Disciples

(2Ki. 16:17).

(Mat. 14:12).

The next question by these Jews was, Are you the Prophet? Moses had promised them the Prophet, like unto himself (cf. Deu. 18:15). This was a promise that the Jews taught their children as soon as they were old enough to understand, It was a promise no Jew ever forgot, Moses was their great deliverer, and ever since the captivities of the Jews they longed for the Prophet, Who they prayed would deliver them from their oppressions. Maybe the Jews thought the Prophet was another forerunner of the Messiah (Joh. 7:40)maybe they thought he was to be the Messiah Himself. Whatever their ideas, John denied being the Prophet. It seems that even John himself was later puzzled as to whether Jesus was only a forerunner, and questioned whether he should look for another (Luk. 7:19).

This delegation from Jerusalem was getting nowhere fast! Their mission thus far was a failure, Johns flat denial will not satisfy the powers that be. They must bring an answer or suffer censure and embarrassment. The manner in which they ask, and the admitted purpose of their questioning shows they were not at all interested in the message of John and what it should mean to their spiritual condition. All they ask is, What do you claim to bethe Sanhedrin wants to know?

Quiz

1.

Name three religious parties that make up the Sanhedrin?

2.

Why would the Jewish rulers fear revolt against Rome?

3.

What is the full import of the word confess?

4.

In how many ways does John the Baptist compare with Elijah?

5.

Give the Scripture references for Old Testament promises of Elijah that was to come, and the Prophet like unto Moses.

Fuente: College Press Bible Study Textbook Series

(19) The narrative is connected with the prologue by the record of John, which is common to both (Joh. 1:15), and opens therefore with And.

The Jews.This term, originally applied to the members of the tribe of Judah, was extended after the Captivity to the whole nation of which that tribe was the chief part. Used by St. John more than seventy times, it is to be understood generally of the representatives of the nation, and of the inhabitants of Juda, and of these as opposed to the teaching and work of Christ. He was himself a Jew, but the true idea of Judaism had led him to the Messiah, and the old name is to him but as the husk that had been burst in the growth of life. It remains for them to whom the name was all, and who, trying to cramp life within rigid forms, had crushed out its power.

Priests and Levites.The word Levite occurs only twice elsewhere in the New Testamentin the parable of the Good Samaritan (Luk. 10:32), and in the description of Joses (Act. 4:36). It is clear from such passages as 2Ch. 17:7-9; 2Ch. 35:3; Neh. 8:7, that part of the function of the Levites was to give instruction in the Law, and it is probable that the scribes were often identical with them. We have, then, here two divisions of the Sanhedrin, as we have two in the frequent phrase of the other Evangelists, scribes, and elders, the scribes (Levites) being common to both, and the three divisions being priests, Levites (scribes), and elders (notables). (Comp. Joh. 1:24, and Note on Mat. 5:20.)

From Jerusalem is to be taken with sent, not with priests and Levites. Emphasis is laid upon the fact that the work of John had excited so much attention that the Sanhedrin sent from Jerusalem to make an official inquiry. The judgment of the case of a false prophet is specially named in the Mishna as belonging to the Council of the Seventy One. (Comp. Luk. 13:33)

Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)

18. THREEFOLD TESTIMONY OF JOHN THAT JESUS, AND NOT HIMSELF, WAS THE MESSIAH, AND ITS EFFECTS, Joh 1:19-51 .

These three testimonies were made by John: first, to the delegation of priests and Levites, 19-28; second, to the people, 29-34; third, to two of his disciples, 35-37. John was now at Bethabara, (or rather Bethania or Bethany,) in the maturity of his ministry. See Joh 1:28. All Jerusalem and Judea had been aroused, and many of the Pharisees and Sadducees (Mat 3:7) had come to his ministry to encounter his stirring admonitions. With perhaps some hostile purpose, the Sanhedrim sent a delegation to him for an explicit declaration of his mission. Our Evangelist, John, and his brother James, were at that time with the Baptist and his disciples, and our John was then able to hear those replies of the Baptist, which decided him afterwards to join Jesus, and which he now quotes in his Gospel to correct those misled disciples of the Baptist who were still claiming him to be superior to Jesus. At the time of John’s receiving this deputation, Jesus, having passed through his baptism and temptation, was now standing among the people, (Joh 1:26,) silently waiting the hour of his manifestation.

Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

FIRST testimony of the Baptist for Jesus, to a delegation from the Sanhedrim, 19-28.

19. Record Not a written, but a spoken, memorable testimony.

The Jews Our evangelist has a way of using the word Jews, as if he were not himself a Jew, and as if they were a foreign race. This arises, doubtless, not only from the fact that the nation has been overthrown, and that he is writing among and for Gentiles, but also from the fact that the Jews had been the deadly enemies of Christ and persecutors of his followers, and so had become, at the time of writing this Gospel, a distinct and hostile sect.

Who art thou? The scathing denunciation by John of the vices of the age had not spared these dignitaries. If they can get him to profess certain things in regard to his own character and mission, he may be arraigned to make his pretensions good, or undergo the punishment of an impostor. He completely eludes their plots.

Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

‘And this is the witness of John when the Judaisers sent priests and Levites to him from Jerusalem to ask him, “Who are you?”

There were many ideas around at this time as to whom God would send to help His people. Some expected the return in bodily form of Elijah the Prophet himself (Mal 4:5), remembering that he had never died but had been taken up by God alive (2Ki 1:11), others expected a uniquely great prophet ‘like Moses’ (Deu 18:15), others expected a Messiah (in Greek ‘Christos’ – ‘anointed one’) – or even more than one Messiah – who would, by God’s power, deliver Israel, a deliverance usually thought of as happening by raising up an army from among the Jews. Thus they wanted to know exactly what John’s claim was.

‘The Judaisers.’ In this case the Pharisees (Joh 1:24). They sent Priests and Levites of their number because these would be seen as having special authority, for the priests were officially guardians and teachers of the truth. The Levites were Temple servants. The Pharisees would have had a special interest in his act of baptising (drenching) in water those who responded to his teaching, for they too practised many kinds of washings. But nothing of an initiatory flavour like John’s (unless we count the bathing required of proselytes. That, however, was self-administered and intended to remove the uncleanness of the Gentile world to which they had belonged).

Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett

John the Baptiser’s Testimony to Jesus and the Calling of Disciples ( Joh 1:19-51 ).

The portrayal of John the Baptiser by the writer is in interesting contrast to the John the Baptiser portrayed in the other Gospels. But an examination of the text soon brings out that this difference is mainly one of emphasis. It is soon apparent that, unlike the other writers this author is not concerned to describe the ministry of John per se, but rather to place all the emphasis on John as a witness to Jesus. Indeed the passage begins with the phrase, ‘and this is the witness of John’ (Joh 1:19). He does not contradict Matthew and Luke, he supplements them. Even the approach of the Jewish leaders questioning him about whom he was claiming to be, and the significance of his baptism, leads up to John’s testimony concerning Jesus.

It should also be noted that this witness of John was very much based on Jewish ideas. He states that he is not the Messiah, or Elijah, or the Prophet. He is rather the fulfilment of Old Testament prophecy, cited in terms of Isa 40:3. He is ‘the voice of one crying in the wilderness’ (just as the Qumran covenanters saw themselves in similar terms). His baptism is a pointer to the fact that the Coming One, Who is to be ‘made manifest to Israel’ (Joh 1:31), will pour out the Holy Spirit on (‘drench with the Holy Spirit’) His followers (Joh 1:33) in accordance with such Old Testament promises as Isa 32:15; Isa 44:1-5. And when John the Baptiser finds terms to use to describe Jesus it is as ‘the Lamb of God Who takes away the sins of the world’ (Joh 1:29) and ‘the drencher with Holy Spirit’ (Joh 1:33) and ‘the Son of God’ (Joh 1:34). Even John’s disciples see Jesus in terms of ‘the Messiah’, ‘the Son of God’, ‘the king of Israel’, the One ‘of Whom the Torah and the Prophets wrote’ (Joh 1:41; Joh 1:45; Joh 1:49). And Nathaniel is seen to have been meditating on what was very much an Old Testament story. Apart from Son of God there is no trace of the language found in Joh 1:1-18, demonstrating how careful the writer was to actually reproduce what John taught.

What should further be noted is that what we learn of John here is very much, although indirectly, supported by what we find in the Dead Sea Scrolls, including the excitement of the approach of ‘the end times’ (the days of the Messiah(s)), the anticipated coming of ‘the Prophet’, and the application of Isa 40:3 to a current situation, in their case to their own situation. They too saw themselves as ‘the voice crying in the wilderness’.

It has often been asked what connection John the Baptiser had with the desert communities like Qumran, and the answer can only be that we do not know. But certainly he must have met with people connected with such communities and have learned something of what they taught, and some have even considered the possibility that he was brought up in one such community. But however that may be John is clearly unique and independent in his thinking. The only community that he calls on men to respond to is the coming of the Kingly Rule of God, and his requirement is that they be baptised once for all as a foretaste of the coming of the Holy Spirit. Thus he is both exclusive and inclusive. But there is no hint that he is forming a new sect.

John the Baptiser’s Testimony to Jesus ( Joh 1:19-34 ).

As a popular and influential preacher it was always a certainty that at some stage John the Baptiser would come under the scrutiny of the Jewish leaders (‘the Jews’, or ‘Judaisers’), for it was a solemn responsibility of the priesthood to test out all who put themselves forward as prophets, and the Rabbis (Scribes) saw it as their own personal responsibility. We should note here that in John’s Gospel the term ‘the Jews’ does not refer to all Jews but usually to the Jewish religious authorities, such as the Sadducees and to the more conservative of the Pharisees, and especially to those who were antagonistic to Jesus. Possibly it is therefore better translated ‘the Judaisers’. For all that we know of John confirms his enlightened Jewishness.

It was these Jewish leaders who sent selected Priests and Levites (temple servants) to interview John. It was the responsibility of the Priests to check out anyone who was making special claims and they wanted to know what claims he was making for himself (v. 19). They knew that he was baptising people in the River Jordan and this suggested to them that he was claiming some special authority.

Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett

John’s Testimony to the Jewish Leaders ( Mat 3:1-12 , Mar 1:1-8 , Luk 3:1-18 ) – John the Baptist was careful with his reply to the Jewish leaders; for he was answering a group of people that would one day seize the Messiah and crucify Him. In addition, when explaining his office and ministry to them, he gave himself a very humble title for a man doing such a great work of God. He described himself as the Word of God describes him, rather than how he saw himself in a humbled condition compared to others in society. We, too, are to say what God’s Word says about us, rather than describe ourselves as defeated.

After giving himself a humble title before the Pharisees, John’s testimony to the Jewish leaders emphasizes the authority of the One coming after him, whose authority supersedes that of the Pharisees, who believed themselves to be in authority.

When we understand the underlying themes of the four Gospels, it is easy to see each of these themes emphasized within their separate accounts of John the Baptist. Since Matthew’s Gospel emphasizes the testimony of the Old Testament Scriptures, he begins in Mat 3:1-12 about how that John the Baptist is represented as the one who fulfilled the prophecy of Isaiah. Mark’s Gospel emphasizes the proclamation of the Gospel. Although Mar 1:1-8 is very similar to Matthew’s passage it gives more text about the proclamation of John the Baptist. Luke’s Gospel emphasizes the prophetic eyewitness testimonies surrounding Jesus Christ’s ministry. Therefore, Luk 3:1-20 begins by referring to verifiable dates of the ministry of John the Baptist with his prophetic message of the coming Saviour. Finally, this parallel passage in John’s Gospel emphasizes John the Baptist’s testimony of the deity of the Lord Jesus Christ as he declares that he was send by God to reveal the Lamb of God to the world. Joh 1:19-28 provides the testimony of John the Baptist as one of the five witnesses declaring the deity of Jesus Christ that make up the structure of the Gospel of John.

Joh 1:19  And this is the record of John, when the Jews sent priests and Levites from Jerusalem to ask him, Who art thou?

Joh 1:19 “And this is the record of John” – Comments Joh 1:19-34 opens and closes with the declaration that this passage of Scripture contains the testimony of John the Baptist.

Joh 1:34, “And I saw, and bare record that this is the Son of God.”

“ when the Jews sent priests and Levites from Jerusalem to ask him, Who art thou ” – Comments – The book of Acts (Act 5:34-37), Josephus ( Antiquities 18.1.1; 20.5.1, Wars 2.4.1, 2.8.1; 2.17.8-10), and Eusebius ( Ecclesiastical History 1.5.3-6) tell us that there were a number of Jewish rebels during this period who rose up and incited the people to resist Roman rule, which brought retaliation upon the Jews by Roman soldiers. Also, it was an area filled with “robbers and imposters” ( Antiquities 20:8.5). These Jewish leaders, who constantly managed the fragile relationship between the Roman governor and the Palestinian Jews, was concerned about the motive of this new preacher in the desert.

Act 5:36-37, “For before these days rose up Theudas, boasting himself to be somebody; to whom a number of men, about four hundred, joined themselves: who was slain; and all, as many as obeyed him, were scattered, and brought to nought. After this man rose up Judas of Galilee in the days of the taxing, and drew away much people after him: he also perished; and all, even as many as obeyed him, were dispersed.”

Joh 1:20  And he confessed, and denied not; but confessed, I am not the Christ.

Joh 1:20 Comments John’s loyalty to God was tested on this occasion to speak the truth without fear man.

Joh 1:21  And they asked him, What then? Art thou Elias? And he saith, I am not. Art thou that prophet? And he answered, No.

Joh 1:20-21 Comments – The Jews were looking for the coming of three individuals, based on Old Testament prophecy:

(1) The Messiah In John’s reply, “I am not the Christ,” he shows that the Jews were looking for the Messiah.

Isa 7:14, “Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.”

Isa 9:6-7, “For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace. Of the increase of his government and peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to order it, and to establish it with judgment and with justice from henceforth even for ever. The zeal of the LORD of hosts will perform this.”

Isa 11:1-2, “And there shall come forth a rod out of the stem of Jesse, and a Branch shall grow out of his roots: And the spirit of the LORD shall rest upon him, the spirit of wisdom and understanding, the spirit of counsel and might, the spirit of knowledge and of the fear of the LORD;”

Mic 5:2, “But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting.”

Zec 9:9, “Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Zion; shout, O daughter of Jerusalem: behold, thy King cometh unto thee: he is just, and having salvation; lowly, and riding upon an ass, and upon a colt the foal of an ass.”

(2) Elijah In the question, “Art thou Elias,” the Jews show that they were looking for the return of Elijah.

Mal 4:5, “Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the LORD:”

(3) The Prophet In the question, “Art thou that prophet,” the priests and Levites were referring to the prophecy of Moses in Deu 18:15, in which Moses prophesied of a prophet coming after him (Joh 7:40).

Deu 18:15, “The LORD thy God will raise up unto thee a Prophet from the midst of thee, of thy brethren, like unto me; unto him ye shall hearken;”

Joh 7:40, “Many of the people therefore, when they heard this saying, said, Of a truth this is the Prophet.”

Jesus’ first disciples reveal the fact that even they were looking for the coming of the Messiah.

Joh 1:41, “He first findeth his own brother Simon, and saith unto him, We have found the Messias, which is, being interpreted, the Christ.”

Joh 1:45, “Philip findeth Nathanael, and saith unto him, We have found him, of whom Moses in the law, and the prophets, did write, Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph.”

Even the sinners had heard of a coming Messiah. Note the response of the Samaritans as the coming of Jesus:

Joh 4:25, “The woman saith unto him, I know that Messias cometh, which is called Christ: when he is come, he will tell us all things.”

Joh 4:40-42, “So when the Samaritans were come unto him, they besought him that he would tarry with them: and he abode there two days. And many more believed because of his own word; And said unto the woman, Now we believe, not because of thy saying: for we have heard him ourselves, and know that this is indeed the Christ, the Saviour of the world.”

At the feast, the people referred to the coming of the Messiah:

Joh 7:41, “Others said, This is the Christ. But some said, Shall Christ come out of Galilee?”

However, some of the Jews held wrong ideas about the coming Messiah:

Joh 7:27, “Howbeit we know this man whence he is: but when Christ cometh, no man knoweth whence he is.”

Joh 7:41-42, “Others said, This is the Christ. But some said, Shall Christ come out of Galilee? Hath not the scripture said, That Christ cometh of the seed of David, and out of the town of Bethlehem, where David was?”

Joh 1:22  Then said they unto him, Who art thou? that we may give an answer to them that sent us. What sayest thou of thyself?

Joh 1:22 Comments – Since John the Baptist did not confess to be one of the three prophetic persons coming to redeem Israel, the Jews then wanted an explanation from John as to his claim of identity.

Joh 1:23  He said, I am the voice of one crying in the wilderness, Make straight the way of the Lord, as said the prophet Esaias.

Joh 1:23 Comments – John responds to the request of the Jews by quoting from an Old Testament prophecy of his coming. This is a paraphrase from Isa 40:3.

Isa 40:3, “The voice of him that crieth in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the LORD, make straight in the desert a highway for our God.”

This Old Testament passage is also quoted in the parallel passages of the Gospels of Matthew and Mark.

Mat 3:3, “For this is he that was spoken of by the prophet Esaias, saying, The voice of one crying in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make his paths straight.”

Mar 1:3, “The voice of one crying in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make his paths straight.”

Some conjecture that John the Baptist may have adobe with the Jewish sect called the Essenes while living in the desert. The Dead Sea Scrolls were kept in the possession of these people and show that John the Baptist would have access to the Scriptures and may have read them and meditated upon them often while living quietly in the desert. At some point in John’s early life the Lord revealed his ministry to him with these Old Testament Scriptures. John was so disconnected with traditional society that his identity was wrapped up in these Old Testament prophecies. In other words, he saw himself, not as a member of any particular group or organization; rather, he saw himself as a man with a divine commission to fulfill.

Joh 1:24  And they which were sent were of the Pharisees.

Joh 1:24 Comments The Pharisees would later play a key role in Jesus being rejected by the Jews and ultimate crucifixion. Thus, Joh 1:24 quickly introduces the Pharisees into his narrative story as leading characters in developing the plot of the Gospel of John.

Joh 1:25  And they asked him, and said unto him, Why baptizest thou then, if thou be not that Christ, nor Elias, neither that prophet?

Joh 1:25 Comments – The Pharisees asked John the Baptist why he was baptizing. He does not give them a clear answer, but rather rebukes and warns them. Later, the next day, in verse 31, John gives the answer when Jesus comes to be baptized. John was baptizing in order to reveal the Messiah to the people of Israel.

Joh 1:26  John answered them, saying, I baptize with water: but there standeth one among you, whom ye know not;

Joh 1:27  He it is, who coming after me is preferred before me, whose shoe’s latchet I am not worthy to unloose.

Joh 1:28  These things were done in Bethabara beyond Jordan, where John was baptizing.

Joh 1:28 Comments John the Baptist received no endorsement or commission from men. His calling and ministry of preaching repentance and water baptism was entirely sanctioned by God alone.

Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures

The Testimony of John the Baptist and His Disciples – The testimony of John and his disciples is found in Joh 1:19-51. This is the second major division of John’s Gospel after the testimony of God the Father (Joh 1:1-18). This passage even opens by stating that it was the testimony of John (Joh 1:19).

Joh 1:19, “ And this is the record of John , when the Jews sent priests and Levites from Jerusalem to ask him, Who art thou?”

While the testimony of the Father (Joh 1:1-18) reveals God the Father’s divine foreknowledge in sending His Son into the world to redeem mankind, the testimony of John the Baptist and his disciples (Joh 1:19-51) reveals the justification that Jesus Christ has come to bring mankind so that we may stand righteous before Him; for He must be slain as the Lamb of God.

Outline – This section can be divided into four subsections or four testimonies with the divisions marked by the phrase “the next day.”

1. John’s Testimony to the Jewish Leaders Joh 1:19-28

2. John’s Testimony to the people Joh 1:29-34

3. John’s Testimony to his disciples Joh 1:35-51

a. The Testimony of John & Andrew Joh 1:35-42

b. The Testimony of Philip & Nathanael Joh 1:43-51

How the Author of John’s Gospel Indirectly Invites His Readers into the Narrative Story – In Joh 1:19-51 author indirectly invites his readers to play the role of his characters and come see the deity of Jesus Christ unfold in the rest of the Gospel. The disciples of John the Baptist and their brothers are invited to “come and see” the Messiah, who promises “greater things than these” to come. As the readers identify themselves with these early disciples, they too are invited to continue reading and see the miracles that Jesus performs in John 2-20 so that they might “see” that Jesus Christ is truly the Lamb of God, sent from Heaven to atone for the sins of mankind.

Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures

The Testimony of John the Baptist.

The embassy of the Jews:

v. 19. And this is the record of John, when the Jews sent priests and Levites from Jerusalem to ask him, Who art thou?

v. 20. And he confessed, and denied not; but confessed, I am not the Christ.

v. 21. And they asked him, What then? Art thou Elias? And he saith, I am not. Art thou that prophet? And he answered, No.

v. 22. Then said they unto him, Who art thou? that we may give an answer to them that sent us. What sayest thou of thyself?

v. 23. He said, I am the voice of one crying in the wilderness, Make straight the way of the Lord, as said the Prophet Esaias.

The gospel-history begins with the testimony of John the Baptist, since his preaching concerned Him whose herald he was. See Mat 3:1-17; Mar 1:1-45; Luk 3:1-38. The evangelist does not relate in general what transactions took place between the representatives of the Jews and the Baptist, but has reference to a special, definite occasion, and notes the verbal testimony given at that time. The Jews, that is, the leaders of the Jews, the members of the Sanhedrin, composed of priests, presbyters, and scribes, among whom were also some very prominent Pharisees, Bent this embassy. This delegation consisted of priests and Levites, and they had certain questions to lay before him for the Bake of obtaining information. The coming of John, his manner of living, the features of his ministry, all these were of such an extraordinary nature as to provoke sensational comment. Hence the question, Who art thou ? (Emphasis on “thou. “) There was a definite purpose connected with the question, for it was not an idle inquiry as to name and birth, but as to his official character. “What personage do you claim to be? What place in the community do you aspire to?” The implication was that John might be the Messiah. If so, the Jewish leaders wanted to know about it; for they deemed it their duty to keep peace in the Church. But John rejected the implication with the greatest seriousness. He expressly put from him even the suggestion of an honor to which he had no right or claim. Without the slightest equivocation or show of reluctant humility John made his confession that he was not the Christ. It would have been an easy matter for him to assume the honor, for the people would have supported him without question; but he put even the suggestion of the temptation away from him. He also rejected the honor of being called the second Elijah in the sense that his was the actual person of Elijah, returned to the world in his former flesh and blood. It had indeed been prophesied, Mal 4:5, that Elijah the prophet should come as the forerunner of the Messiah, that is, that a prophet in the power and spirit of Elijah would prepare the way for Christ. And Jesus expressly states, Mat 17:10-13, that John the Baptist was the Elijah who was to come. But because of the false understanding that the Jews had of this Elijah, John could not admit that identity without misleading them. He denied, in the third place, that he was that prophet. For the Jews understood the prophecy, Deu 18:15, not of the Messiah Himself, but of some special prophet, a faithful prophet, 1 Maccabees 14:41, who was to terminate the prophetic period and usher in the Messianic reign. See Joh 6:14; Joh 7:40. With some impatience the members of the delegation now demanded a clear answer, a positive statement. They were under obligations to bring back an answer to the Sanhedrin, and could not go back without having accomplished the object of their mission. And John now did make a definite confession concerning himself, referring to the prophecy Isa 40:3. He was the voice of one in the wilderness, calling loudly and urgently that people should make straight and level the way of the Lord. The Messiah was about to enter, to come to His people, and Israel was to prepare the way for Him by sincere repentance. Only those that sincerely acknowledge their sins and repent of them may obtain salvation in Christ. That was the chief, the prominent part of John’s ministry, to call Israel to repentance.

Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann

Joh 1:19-20. And this is the record of John, &c. These verses would be better rendered thus, Now this is the testimony of John, (mentioned Joh 1:15.) When the Jews sent priests, &c. Joh 1:20 then he confessed, &c. The rulers at Jerusalem having been informed, that the Baptist’s extraordinary sanctity, zeal, and eloquence, together with the solemnity of his baptizing, had made so great an impression on the people, that they were beginning to think he might be the Messiah, resolved that certain of their number, whose capacity and learning rendered them equal to the task, should go and examine him. When these messengers arrived at Bethabara, they asked the Baptist if he was the Messiah, or Elias, or that prophet who was said to arise and usher in the Messiah, of whose coming there was at this time a general expectation? And this is the record of John; this is the testimony which John bare publicly to Jesus when the Jews, that is, the sanhedrim, or great council of the nation, who took cognizance of the pretension which any person made to the character and office of a prophet, sent priests and Levites from Jerusalem, persons of the first consideration for learning and office, and who, being maintained at the public expence, had better opportunities of studying the law, and acquiring knowledge, to ask him, Who art thou? “What character dost thou assume to thyself!” The question is not concerning his office, but his person. And he confessed and denied not, but in the strongest terms solemnly protested I am not the Messiah; “I know that the people begin to look on me as their long-expected Deliverer; but I tell you plainly,they are mistaken.” To every candid judge, the declaration which on this occasion John made so freely to the priests and Levites, and which on other occasions he repeated publicly in the hearing of the people, will appear a strong proof of his divine mission, notwithstanding he performed no miracle; for when deputies from so august a body as the senate of Israel seemed to signify, (though probably with an ill design,) that, in order to their acknowledginghim as the Messiah, they wanted only a declaration from himself; if he had been an impostor, he would immediately have grasped at the honours offered him, and have given himself out for the Messiah; but he was animated by a different spirit; integrity and truth were evidently the guides of his conduct. Why then should we entertain any doubt of his mission, seeing that he expressly claimed the character of a messenger from God?

Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke

Joh 1:19-20 . The historical narrative , properly so called, now begins, and quite in the style of the primitive Gospels (comp. Mar 1 ; Act 10:36-37 ; Act 13:23-25 ), with the testimony of the Baptist.

] and , now first of all to narrate the testimony already mentioned in Joh 1:15 ; for this , and not another borne before the baptism, is meant; see note foll. Joh 1:28 .

] “The following is the testimony of John, which he bore when,” etc. [111] Instead of , the evangelist puts , because the idea of time was with him the predominant one. Comp. Pflugk, ad Hec . 107; Ellendt, Lex. Soph . II. p. 393. Had he written , his thought would have been: “Herein did his testimony consist, that the Jews sent to him, and he confessed,” etc.

] means, even in such passages as this, where it is no merely indifferent designation of the people (as in Joh 2:6 ; Joh 2:13 , Joh 3:1 , Joh 4:22 , Joh 5:1 , Joh 18:33 ff., and often), nothing else than the Jews; yet John, writing when he had long severed himself from Judaism, makes the body of the Jews , as the old religious community from which the Christian Church had already completely separated itself, thus constantly appear in a hostile sense in face of the Lord and His work, as the ancient theocratic people in corporate opposition to the new community of God (which had entered into their promised inheritance) and to its Head. How little may be deduced from this as ground of argument against the age and genuineness of the Gospel, see my Introd . 3. For the rest, in individual passages, the context must always show who , considered more minutely as matter of history, the persons in question were by whom are represented, as in this place, where it was plainly the Sanhedrim [112] who represented the people of the old religion. Comp. Joh 5:15 , Joh 9:22 , Joh 18:12 ; Joh 18:31 , etc.

] priests, consequently, with their subordinates , who had, however, a position as teachers, and aspired to priestly authority (see Ewald and Hengstenberg). The mention of these together is a trait illustrative of John’s precision of statement , differing from the manner of the Synoptics, but for that very reason, so far from raising doubts as to the genuineness, attesting rather the independence and originality of John (against Weisse), who no longer uses the phrase so often repeated in the Synoptics, “the scribes and elders ,” because it had to him already become strange and out of date.

] for John baptized (Joh 1:25 ), and this baptism had reference to Messiah’s kingdom (Eze 36:25-26 ; Eze 33:23 ; Zec 13:1 ). He had, generally, made a great sensation as a prophet, and had even given rise to the opinion that he was the Messiah (Luk 3:15 ; comp. Act 13:25 ); hence the question of the supreme spiritual court was justified , Deu 18:21-22 , Mat 21:23 . The question itself is not at all framed in a captious spirit. We must not, with Chrysostom and most others, regard it as prompted by any malicious motive, but must explain it by the authoritative position of the supreme court. Nevertheless it implies the assumption that John regarded himself as the Messiah; and hence his answer in Joh 1:20 , hence also the emphatic precedence given to the ; comp. Joh 8:25 . Luthardt too hastily concludes from the form of the question, that the main thing with them was the person , not the call and purpose of God. But they would have inferred the call and purpose of God from the person , as the question which they ask in Joh 1:25 shows.

.] belongs to .

.] still dependent on the .

. .] emphatic prominence given to his straightforward confession; , Euthymius Zigabenus; comp. Eur. El . 1057: ; Soph. Ant . 443; Dem. de Chers . 108. 73: . See Bremi in loc. Valcken. Schol. ad Act 13:11 .

.] The first . . was absolute ( Add. ad Est 1:15 , and in the classics); this second has for subject the following sentence ( recitative). Moreover, “vehementer auditorem commovet ejusdem redintegratio verbi,” ad Herenn . iv. 28. There is, however, no side glance here at the disciples of John (comp. the Introd.). To the evangelist, who had himself been the pupil of the Baptist, the testimony of the latter was weighty enough in itself to lead him to give it emphatic prominence.

According to the right order of the words (see crit. notes), ., the emphasis lies upon ; I on my part , which implies that he knew another who was the Messiah.

[111] Following Origen and Cyril, Paulus and B. Crusius suppose that begins a new sentence, of which , etc., is to be taken as the apodosis contrary to the simplicity of John’s style.

[112] Comp. in Homer, which often means the proceres of the Greeks.

Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary

II

THE GOSPEL OF THE HISTORICAL MANIFESTATION OF CHRIST, ON HIS SELF-REVELATION AND HIS VICTORY IN CONFLICT WITH THE DARKNESS OF THE WORLD

Joh 1:19 to Joh 20:31

FIRST SECTION

The Reception which Christ, the Light of the World, finds in His Life of Love among the men akin to the Light, the Elect

Joh 1:19 to Joh 4:54

I.

John the Baptist, and his public and repeated Testimony concerning Christ. Jesus accredited as the Christ, attested the Son of God, the eternal Lord, and the Lamb of God.

Joh 1:19-34

(Joh 1:19-28 : Pericope for the 4th Sunday in Advent.)

(1) Testimony Of John The Baptist Before The Rulers Of The Jews. Jesus The Messiah Coming After The Baptist, The Eternal Pre-historical And Super-historical Lord Before Him

19And this is the record [testimony] of John, when the Jews sent [to him]122 priests and Levites from Jerusalem, to ask him, Who art thou? 20And he confessed, and denied not; but [and he] confessed, I am not [Not I am]123 the Christ. 21And they asked him, What then? Art thou Elias [Elijah]? And he saith, I am not. Art 22thou that prophet? And he answered, No. Then124 [in official demand] said they unto him, Who art thou? that we may give an answer to them that sent us. What sayest thou of thyself? 23He said, I am the voice of one crying in the wilderness, Make straight the way of the Lord, as said [Isaiah] the prophet Esaias [ch. John 40:3]. 24And they125 which were sent were of the Pharisees [And they had been sent by the Pharisees]. 25And they asked him, and said unto him, Why baptizest thou then, if thou be not that [the] Christ, nor Elias [Elijah], neither126 that [the] prophet? 26John answered them, saying, I baptize with [in] water; but there standeth one among you [in the midst of you there standeth one], whom ye know not: 27he it is127 [This is he] who coming after me, is preferred [taketh place, or, hath come to be] before me, whose shoe’s latchet I am not worthy to unloose. 28These things were done in Bethabara [Bethany]128 beyond Jordan, where John was baptizing.

(2) testimony of the baptist before his disciplines, the historical lamb of god; upon him the dove

29The next day John [he]129 seeth Jesus coming unto him, and saith, Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away [taketh away by bearing, or, beareth away]130 the sin of the world! 30This is he of whom I said, After me cometh a man which [who] is preferred [taketh place, or, hath come to be] before me; for he was before me. 31And I knew him not; but that he should be made manifest to Israel, therefore am I come 32[for this cause came I] baptizing with [in] water.131 And John bare record [witness], saying, I saw the Spirit descending from heaven like132 a dove, and it abode upon him. 33And I knew him not: but he that sent me to baptize with [in] water, the same said unto me, Upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending and remaining [abiding] on him, the same is he which [who] baptizeth with [in] the Holy Ghost [Spirit]. 34And I saw [have seen, ,] and bare record [have borne witness, ] that this is the Son of God.

EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL

[Now follows the historical narrative. The testimony of John the Baptist, and the call of the first disciples form the historical introduction or the portico of the public life of Christ. John omits the birth, early history and discourses of the Baptist, as being sufficiently known from the Synoptists, and confines himself to his testimony after the baptism (alluded to as a past fact in Joh 1:33-34) and the temptation of Christ in the wilderness, when He stood already in the midst of the Jews (Joh 1:26). The testimony is threefold, 1) before the deputies of the Sanhedrin from Jerusalem (1928); 3) a day afterwards, before a larger public and His disciples, as it would seem (2934); 3) again a day afterwards, before two of His disciples, who now joined Jesus (3537).The examination of John the Baptist by the official messengers of the Sanhedrin, who had the supervision of the public teaching of religion among the Jews (Mat 21:23), displays the prevalence and confusion of the Messianic expectations, and the hostility of the leaders of the hierarchy to the approaching new dispensation. The five questions of the priests represent a descending climax (the Messiah; Elijah; an anonymous prophet; why baptizest thou?); the short, laconic answers of the Baptist, in striking contrast, are rising from negation to affirmation, and turn the attention away from himself and towards Christ.P. S.]

Joh 1:19. And this is.The gospel history itself begins with the testimony of John the Baptist. Comp. Matthew 3; Mark 1; Luke 3. The question is whether the same testimony is meant here, as in Joh 1:15. Origen supposed this to be another testimony; Meyer thinks it the same. Evidently in Joh 1:15 a general testimony, with , is distinguished from a special, . This most public testimony concerning Jesus before the rulers is undoubtedly meant here. It is a definite pointing of the rulers of the Jews to the person of the Messiah, not related so distinctly by the Synoptists, but of the highest importance for the history of the temptation. This: , the following [it is the predicate, the subject. A verbal testimony is meant. Record now refers to written evidence.P. S.]. ” points also to a particular event, which took place at a particular time. That this event must have followed the baptism of Jesus is clear;133 because, according to Joh 1:31-33, it was that which gave the Baptist himself his first certainty respecting the person of Jesus; and this certainty he expresses here, Joh 1:26-27. Likewise Joh 1:29. Olshausen, Baumgarten-Crusius, and others, place the baptism between the two testimonies, Joh 1:19 and Joh 1:29; Ewald, between Joh 1:31 and Joh 1:32; all against the testimony of the section before us. That John knew of the existence of the Messiah earlier, and with human reverence presumed that he found Him in the person of Jesus, Mat 3:14, is not inconsistent with his still needing a divine attestation. As regards the history of the temptation, its termination coincides with the present testimony; for Jesus, the next day, comes again behind the Baptist, and soon afterwards (not forty days after) returns to Galilee.

When the Jews from Jerusalem.[The Synoptists, who wrote before the destruction of Jerusalem, seldom use the term Jews as distinct from Christians (Matthew five times, Mark seven times, Luke five times); John, who wrote after the destruction of Jerusalem and after the final separation of the Synagogue from the Christian church, uses it very often (over seventy times in the Gospel and twice in the Apoc.).P. S.] , probably as yet primarily in the neutral sense, though already conceived as about to become a hostile body, on the way to apostasy from true Judaism in opposition to the Messiah. The conception is the historical one of the Jews as the theocratic people, as in Joh 2:13; Joh 3:1; Joh 5:1, then branching into a friendly one (Joh 4:22; Joh 18:33) and a hostile (Joh 5:10; Joh 7:1; Joh 8:31; Joh 10:24, etc.), which in the sequel prevails. In the latter sense the term therefore denotes the Jews as Judaists. Meyer therefore is not perfectly accurate when he says: John, in his writing, lets the Jews, as the old communion, from which the Christian has already entirely withdrawn, appear steadily in a hostile position to the Lord and His work, the ancient theocratic people as an opposition party to the church of God and its Head. The Jews do certainly appear in this character predominantly in John, and with good reason Meyer observes that this can furnish no argument, against the genuineness of His Gospel (against Fischer and Hilgenfeld). The expression, The Jews, as he also remarks, varies according to the context; here it is the Jews from Jerusalem, the Sanhedrin.

Priests and Levites.[The two classes of persons employed about the temple service, Jos 3:3. In the wider sense, Levites designates the descendants of Levi; in a narrower sense, as here, the subordinate officers of the Jewish hierarchy, as distinct from the priests of the family of Aaron.P. S.] The Levites as an attendant body were designed, under certain circumstances, to arrest the Baptist, and at any rate to add state as a convoy of police, or to enhance the official dignity of the priests. It is a touch of historical accuracy.

Who art thou?i.e., in thy official, theocratic character. That they supposed He might lay claim to the Messiahship, is evident from the answer of John. They had official right, according to Deu 18:21, to inquire into his character and his credentials as a prophet. They had occasion to do so in his baptism (Joh 1:25), not only because the baptism connected itself with the kingdom of Messiah (Eze 36:25; Eze 37:23; Zec 13:1), but also because the baptism was a declaration concerning the whole congregation of the people, that it was unclean (Hag 2:14), which could easily offend the pride of the Pharisees. Besides, the people were already inclined to take him for the Messiah, Luk 3:15. According to Joh 1:24, the delegates were of the party of the Pharisees. These had probably moved in the Sanhedrin, that the deputation be sent, because the Messianic question was of much more importance to them than to the Sadducees, and because they, with their sensuous Messianic hopes, took the matter of the credentials of the Messiah more strictly in their more external sense.

Joh 1:20. And he confessed, and denied not.Should this mean only; He denied not his own real character? he confessed in this matter the truth? The double expression, positive and negative, would be rather strong for this. The question of the Sanhedrin set before him the temptation to declare himself the Christ. But in so doing he would have denied the Christ whom he already knew, and denied his own better, prophetic knowledge. We suppose, therefore, that his confessing and not denying in regard to himself imply at the same time his confessing and not denying in regard to Christ. This is indicated also by the emphatic order of the words: , which is supported by the best authorities as against . Meyer: I for my part, implying that he knows another, who is the Messiah.The reserve of the Baptist towards the deputation shows the mighty prophet, who understood them. He leaves each successive development of his deposition to be drawn from him, till the moment for his testimony arrives. This mysterious bearing is no doubt intended also to humble and press the self-conceited spirit.

Joh 1:21. What then? Art thou Elijah?The question is a half inference. He who comes with such pretensions must be, if not the Messiah Himself, at least the Elijah who precedes Him. They refer to the Messianic prophecy, Mal 4:5. The pure sense of this prophecy, that an ideal Elijah should precede the Messiah, which John actually was (Luk 1:17; Mat 11:14; Mat 17:10), had early become corrupted among the Jews, as is shown by the very translation of the passage in the Septuagint. (Elijah the Tishbite).134 Thus these messengers understood the word entirely in a superstitious sense, taking it literally for the actual Elijah. Hence John answers categorically: I am not [not the Tishbite, whom you mean.]135 But he adds no explanation; for this would have involved him in an exegetical controversy, and turned him from his main object, which was to testify of Christ.

Art thou the prophet?The next question in the spirit of their theology; hence occurring immediately. The prophet, with the article; the well-known prophet; a personage in their Messianic theology presumed to be familiar. According to Chrysostom [Bengel], Lcke, Bleek, Meyer, [Alford], the prophet meant would be the one spoken of in Deu 18:15;136 but this we must certainly, with Hengstenberg and Tholuck, deny, for this prophecy was at least in Act 3:22; Act 7:37 referred to the Messiah. It is a question whether the passages, Joh 6:14; Joh 7:40, refer to the passage in Deuteronomy. From Mat 16:14 it is sufficiently evident that an expectation of Jeremiah137 or some one of the prophets as the forerunner of the Messiah was cherished. Probably this expectation was connected with the doctrine of the woes of the Messiah, that is, with what was known of the suffering Messiah, The wailing Jeremiah, or one of the later prophets of affliction, seemed better fitted for the fore-runner of the suffering Messiah, than the stern, judicial Elijah. The gradual shaping of this expectation of Jeremiah as a guardian angel in the theocratic day of suffering, appears in 2Ma 2:7; 2Ma 15:13. This particular prophet, therefore, is meant, who should complete the forerunning office of Elijah, and probably precede him. This expectation also was here literally and superstitiously taken. Hence again: No!the short answer Luthardt quite falsely refers to the prophets in the second part of Isaiah (c. 40.). Against this see Meyer [p. 101, note].

Joh 1:22. Then said they unto him, Who art thou?Now they come out with the categorical official demand of an explanation. Yet we must notice that they do not yet say: Thou art unauthorized. They distinguish the prophetic appearance of the Baptist in general from his baptism. They wished primarily that he should explain himself concerning his prophetic mission. [Alford: They ever ask about his person: he ever refers them to his office. He is no onea voice merely: it is the work of God, the testimony to Christ, which is every thing. So the formalist ever in the church asks, Who is he? while the witness for Christ only exalts, only cares for Christs work.P. S.]

Joh 1:23. I am the voice of one crying.Isa 40:3. As Christ, when He calls Himself the Son of Man, applied to Himself as Messiah a passage of prophecy which had been unnoticed and obscured by the Jewish Messianic theology, Dan 7:13, so did the Baptist when he called himself the voice of one crying in the wilderness. By this the same subject was meant, as by the Elijah of Malachi, but the passage had not been corrupted by a carnal interpretation, and was perfectly fitted to denote the unassuming spirit of the Baptist, who would be wholly absorbed in his mission to be a herald of the coming Messiah. The quotation is after the Septuagint, except instead of . It appears from this passage that the Synoptists (Mat 3:3), following Johns own declaration respecting himself, have applied that passage of the prophet in its direct intent to him.

Joh 1:24. Were of the Pharisees.This conveys primarily the explanation that they did not understand a Scripture for which they had no distinct exegetical tradition; at least they knew not how to apply the passage cited to John. Then, that they were disposed to allow the right to baptize only to one of the three persons named: the Messiah Himself and His two fore-runners. Baptism was the symbol of the purification which should precede the Messianic kingdom. The tract Kiddushin says (see Tholuck): Elijah comes, and will declare clean and unclean.

Joh 1:26. I baptize in water.In this answer Heracleon, and Lcke and De Wette after him, have missed the striking point. According to Meyer, John now explains himself more particularly respecting what he has said. To the question: Why baptizest thou? he answers: I baptize only with water; the baptism of the spirit is reserved to the Messiah. To the reminder: Thou art not the Messiah, etc., he answers: The Messiah is already in the midst of you, therefore is this baptism needful. The matter resolves itself simply into Johns declaration: The Messiah is the proper Baptist of the prophets; and his implied assertion: Your interpretation of Eze 36:25 is false. But because this true Baptist is here, I with my water-baptism prepare for His baptizing with the Spirit. It is at the same time implied that it is rather the Messiah who accredits him, than he the Messiah. In water. See Mat 3:11.

But there standeth one among you.If the and the be omitted, as they are in Codd. B. C. L., the clause would proceed: One whom ye know not, cometh after me, etc. We retain these words, which are doubted by Tholuck and Meyer; because John in Joh 1:15 has noted this formula as the most public testimony of the Baptist.Whom ye know not.A reproof: Ye ought to have known him already: a hint: Ye must now learn to know him. The words: Standeth, or hath come, among you can hardly refer only to the birth of Jesus in Bethlehem and His obscurity in Nazareth. They look to the baptism of Christ as the beginning of His public appearance. The objections of Baur and Bamlein to this are groundless.

Joh 1:27. He it is, who coming after me [behind me].See Joh 1:15.Whose shoes string, etc. [In the East, people wore only sandals, or the soles of a shoe, bound fast to the foot by strings]. See Mat 3:11. That is: Whom I am not worthy to serve as a slave. It is a parallel, or a concrete form, of the expression, Joh 1:15 : on .

Joh 1:28. In Bethabara beyond Jordan.Rather Bethany, see the Textual Notes. But not the Bethany on the Mount of Olives, Joh 11:18. The place seems to have been a ford on the further side of the Jordan in Pera, not otherwise known under this name of Bethany. Origen explored that region, and found a Bethabara (see Jdg 7:24) about opposite Jericho. The conjecture of Possinus and Hug, that the name , domus navis, expresses the same as , domus transitus (ford-house), is not invalidated by the suggestion (of Meyer) that this etymology does not suit Bethany on the Mount of Olives; for the name of Bethany might have arisen in different ways. Bolten and Paulus, by a period after , made out the Bethany on the Mount of Olives; Kuinoel made the beyond, this side; Baur invented the fiction that the author would make Jesus begin, as well as finish His ministry in Bethany.The statement that the deputation received their answer from the Baptist at Bethany, beyond Jordan, leads to the inference that on their return through the wilderness they already came unintentionally into the neighborhood of Jesus at Jericho.

Joh 1:29. The next day John seeth Jesus coming unto him.The Evangelist finds the days now following so important that he enumerates them in order; the first, Joh 1:29; the second, Joh 1:35; the third, Joh 1:43. Hereupon Luthardt observes, p. John 76: The Evangelist begins and closes with a week; on the third day those disciples come to him, on the fourth Simon, and on the fifth Philip and Nathanael join the others, on the sixth Jesus is journeying with His disciples, on the seventh in Cana. If this exact reckoning of a week were designed (so that Jesus, according to Luthardt, would, as it were, keep a Sabbath in Cana), the fourth day would have to be made distinct, and the third (John 2) marked as the seventh. It is much more natural to let the three days come so that the calling of Peter falls late in the evening of the day of Joh 1:35. The third day (Joh 2:1) is, according to Origen, Baur and Meyer, the third from the day of Joh 1:43. Baur gives as a reason for this (which is a change from a former view of his) a silly fancy, that the six days should correspond to the six water-pots in John 2. Meyer better: If it were the third day from that of Joh 1:35, or the day following that of Joh 1:43, we should have again. Against his longer reckoning (Joh 2:1 : the third day from that of Joh 1:43) we must, however, observe that the proper starting-point of the reckoning thus far is still the day of the accrediting of Jesus as the Messiah on the part of John. It is important to the Evangelist to set forth what a life from day to day was then begun. On the first day, the pointing of the disciples to Jesus; on the next, three or four disciples gained; on the clay after, two more. If now we suppose that the third day is the same with the of Joh 1:43, or is reckoned from the accrediting of Jesus, Joh 1:19, this explains the fact that the marriage-feast had already continued nearly three days when Jesus arrived, and that the wine was exhausted. The line between the day in the wilderness and the day of Joh 1:43 still remains somewhat uncertain.Our first date, Joh 1:29, denotes the day after that declaration of the Baptist to the deputation from Jerusalem, not one of the days following. Jesus returns from the temptation. The reason why He returns to John is not given; yet it is at hand. John must know that Jesus intended to disappoint the chiliastic Messianic hopes of the Jews. He must also bear witness of the course which Jesus intended to take; he must be guarded to the utmost against the vexation of imagining that Jesus would adopt a different course from what he might have expected in the Messiah accredited by him. And then this also was what led to Johns transfer of his disciples to the discipleship of Jesus, though the outward attachment of the Baptist himself to Jesus was not to be expected.

Behold the Lamb of God.The Baptist knew from three sources the appointment of the Messiah to suffering: (1) The experience of suffering by the pious, especially the prophets, as well as the import of the sacrificial types and the prophecies of the suffering Messiah. (2) The baptism of Christ, which indicated to him that Christ must bow under the servant-form of sinners, or which was an omen of His suffering, see Mat 3:14. (3) A decisive point, which has not been noticed: The Baptist has directed the deputation from Jerusalem to the Messiah, who was in the vicinity. He may therefore suppose that they have come to know him, And now he sees Christ coming back from the wilderness, alone, in earnest, solemn mood, with the expression of separation from the world. He could not have been a man of the Spirit, without having perceived in the Spirit that an adversity, or a sacrificial suffering of premonitory conflict, had taken place. This accounts also for his first exclamation being: Behold the Lamb of God!and the supposition that the Evangelist has put his own knowledge into the mouth of the Baptist (Strauss, Weisse), loses all support. That the subsequent human wavering of the Baptist, Mat 11:3, is not inconsistent with his present divine enlightenment and inspiration, needs no explanation; the opposition between the divine and human elements is nowhere entirely transcended in the Old Testament prophets. And Mat 11:3 itself proves that John had till then depended with assurance upon Christ, and even then could not give Him up under temptation. The Baptist, says Meyer in explanation, had not a sudden flash of natural light, or a rising conviction, but a revelation. But sudden flashes produced by rising convictions can hardly be separated from revelations, unless we conceive the latter as immediate, magical effects. With a natural light we have nothing to do.

Now comes the question: What is meant by the Lamb of God? By the article it is designated as appointed, by the genitive as belonging to God, appointed for Him for a sacrifice. Isaiah 53.; Rev 5:6; Rev 13:8. The phrase implies also, selected by God. The question arises, however, whether the expression is to be referred to the paschal lamb (with Grotius, Lampe, Hofmann, Luthardt [Bengel, Olshausen, Hengstenberg], and others), to the sin-offering (with Baumgarten-Crusius and Meyer), or to the prophetic passage, Isa 53:7 (with Chrysostom) [Origen, Cyril, Lcke, Thol., De Wette, Brckner, Meyer (5th ed.), Ewald]. For it is clear that we are not, with Herder, to suppose it a mere figure of a religiously devoted servant of God. We are evidently directed primarily to that passage of Isaiah 53; for John had taken the description of his own mission from the second part of Isaiah, and the Messianic import of the passage named cannot be evaded (see Lcke, I. p. 408 sqq.; Tholuck, p. 90; my Leben Jesu, II. p. 466), and the particular features suit. [To the same chapter in Isaiah reference is had Mat 8:17; Act 8:32; 1Pe 2:22-25.P. S.] The Septuagint reads for the Hebrew , Joh 1:7. It is said in Joh 1:10, He made His soul an offering for sin, . It is said of Him in Joh 1:4 : He hath borne (, Sept. ) our griefs. Specially important is Joh 1:11 : By his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many; for he shall bear () their iniquities. And the bearing, in connection with the idea of the offering for sin and the vicarious expiation, involves the idea of taking away, carrying off; it is therefore of no account that the Baptist says , and the Septuagint (see 1Jn 3:5), for it is the way of the Seventy to express the bearing of sin by .138 The interpretations: put away (Kuinoel), support (Gabler), abstractly considered, deviate from the notion of atonement, though they are included in the concrete term : sufferendurepiacularly bear take away and blot out. Latterly the term has been emptied of its element of expiation again by Hofmann and Luthardt, and referred to the then beginning suffering of Christ through the sins of men in His human weakness, without reference to His death (sea against this Meyer and Tholuck). Of course, on the other hand, the word of the Baptist is not to be referred, as a mature dogmatic perception, to the future death of Christ. Yet a germ-perception of the atoning virtue of the holy suffering even the ancient prophets had, Isaiah 53. And how powerfully the thought had seized the Baptist, appears from his naming sin ( ) in the singular,139 as the burden which Christ has to bear, and besides as the sin of the world.But if the prophet, Isaiah 53., evidently himself went back to the notion of the expiatory sacrifice, then the Baptist also did the same. Lambs were by preference taken for the sin-offering, Lev 5:6; see Tholuck. Christ, as the Lamb appointed by God, is a sin-offering, which atones for the guilt of the world. The fact that men have made Him, over and above this, even a curse-bearer, and that under the direction of God, is not included in the idea before us, yet neither is it excluded by it. But as regards the further step backward, to the paschal lamb, which Justin Martyr, Clement of Alexandria, and others combined with the reference to Isaiah 53., it is contested by Tholuck and Meyer. Justly, so far as the paschal lamb in the stricter sense served as a meal of thank-offering; but unjustly, so far as the paschal lamb in the wider sense formed the root of the whole system of sacrifice, and pointed by the blood on the door-posts to the atoning offering, nay, even ran back to the curse-offering, the extermination of the Egyptian first-born.Mark further the rapt manner in which the Baptist utters the great word: Behold the Lamb of God! The sequel shows that he speaks thus to his disciples.140

Joh 1:30. This is he of whom I said.Meyer properly observes: These words refer not to the testimony in Joh 1:26-27, but to all that John had previously said of the coming Messiah. John had described the divine mark of the Messiah, before he knew the particular person; now he joyfully shows that he rightly described Him, and said none too much.

Joh 1:31. And I knew him not.(Not: Even I knew him not.)141That is, I did not with divine certainty, by revelation, know Him;though in his human feeling he reverenced Him in unrestrained foreboding (against Lcke, Ewald). Hence no contradiction to Matthew (against Strauss, Baur). But now he shows how he came to this knowledge. As he was to introduce the Messiah in official authentication, he must have a token from above. This was given him.

But that he should be made manifest.The ultimate and highest object of his baptism did not exclude the tributary purposes of preparing a people for the Lord. According to the Jewish tradition in Justin (Dial, cum Tryph., ch. viii.) the Messiah was to remain unknown [] till Elijah should anoint Him, and thereby make Him known to all [ ].Baptizing in water [ () ].An humble description of himself in comparison with Him who baptizes with the Spirit. Meyer.

Joh 1:32. And John bare witness, saying.We might expect the mark of the Messiah given to John to come before his testimony, i.e., Joh 1:33 before Joh 1:32. Hence Lcke and others read this verse as a parenthesis. But this exhibition of the testimony of John is in two parts. The Evangelist distinguishes the first exclamation of John respecting Christ as the Lamb of God from the then following testimony of the way in which he came to know Him. Thus we have to make a new paragraph at Joh 1:32. John bears witness of the way in which he came to know Jesus in His baptism as the Messiah.

I saw the Spirit descending.Here we must (1) assert against Baur, that the Baptist is speaking of the actual event of the baptism; this is clear from the connection of Joh 1:32 with Joh 1:31; (2) dispute [Theodore of Mops.], Tholuck, [Alford] and others in the idea that the Baptist had the manifestation alone, and that it was an inward transaction, excluding externality (though not excluding all objective element). Even the in Luk 3:22, cannot prove the outwardness of the phenomenon; for it rather expresses only the unusual fact that the dove served as the symbol of the Spirit. Tholuck. Against this are (1) the fact that the event was given by an inward voice to the Baptist as the token. On the supposition of mere inwardness the inward voice alone would have sufficed; at all events it must have come at the same time with the token. (2) The mention of the appearance of the Spirit, , as a dove. Merely inwardly seen, this would be only an apparition, not a token. (3) is used, as in Joh 1:14, of a seeing which is neither merely outward, nor yet merely inward. (4) The participation of Christ; according to the Synoptists, in the seeing of the phenomenon; to which must be added the voice: Thou art my beloved Son!showing that Christ was the centre of the whole appearance. (5) The analogy of the signs (rushing wind and tongues of fire) at the outpouring of the Holy Ghost on the day of Pentecost. See this Comm. on Mat 3:13-17; p. 77. Tholuck: The point of comparison between the symbol (symbolical phenomenon, we should say) and the Spirit, Theodore of Mopsuestia takes to be the affectionate tenderness and attachment of the dove to men; Calvin, its gentleness; Neander, its tranquil flying; Baumgarten-Crusius, a motherly, brooding virtue, consecrating the water (Gen 1:1); most, from Mat 10:16, purity and innocence.142 This last is certainly to be taken as the main point,143 yet it is connected with the gentle, noiseless flight of this particular bird. In the Targum on Son 2:12, the dove is regarded as the symbol of the Spirit of God. We suppose that the phenomenon and the symbol are to be distinguished; the phenomenon we take to have been a soft, hovering brightness, resembling the flashes from a dove floating down in the sunlight (Psa 68:13 : Yet shall ye be as the wings of a dove covered with silver, and her feathers with yellow gold; see Act 2:3); and the symbol, no one virtue of the dove, but her virtues, as a of spiritual life, which, as such, never consists in a single virtue (see Mat 10:16); hence purity, loveliness, gentleness, friendliness towards men, and vital warmth. On the reference of the dove to the church see the Comm. on Mat 3:13-17; p. 78. Hence the abiding upon him [ , , with the accusative signifies the direction to] is part of the sign; in the continuance of the radiance the Baptist received assurance that the Spirit abode upon Christ.

Misinterpretations of this event: (a) The Ebionitic: An impartation of the Spirit, beginning with the baptism, (b) The Gnostic: The Logos uniting Himself with the Man Jesus;a view dragged in again by Hilgenfeld. (c) Baur: The and the are, according to Johns representation, identical.144 Attempted interpretations: (1) Frommann: The preparation of the Logos for coming forth out of his immanent union with God: (2) Lcke, Neander, etc.: The awakening of the divine-human consciousness. (3) Hofmann, Luthardt: The impartation of official powers. (4) Baumgarten-Crusius, Tholuck: The impartation of the Spirit for transmission to mankind. (5) Meyer: Not an impartation to Jesus, but only an objective sign () divinely granted to the spiritual intuition of the Baptist.

We find in this occurrence not merely the full development of Christs consciousness of Himself personally as the God-Man, but also of the accompanying consciousness of His Messianic mission, as a calling, in particular, to self-humiliation in order to exaltation;a development produced by a corresponding communication of the Holy Ghost without measure, which should make Him, in the course of His humiliation towards exaltation, the Baptist of the Spirit (Geistestufer) for the whole world (see Isaiah 11; Joel 3; Matthew 28) This consciousness is (1) that of being the Son of God, and (2) that of the divine good pleasure blessing the path of humiliation upon which in His baptism He entered.

Joh 1:33. And I knew him not.Looking back to the earlier stage, and strongly emphasizing the ignorance by the repetition. Then the Baptist tells us how the miraculous appearance became to him the sign. In the nature of the case, this mark must have been given him before the occurrence itself. The description of Christ as the true Baptist, the Baptizer with the Holy Ghost, corresponds with Johns humble sense of the impotence of his own baptism of water.

Joh 1:34. And I have seen.In the perfect. Plainly this cannot be understood of a mere internal process.And have borne witness.Not: I consider myself as having now testified (De Wette); nor: I have testified and do now testify (Lcke). The Baptist undoubtedly looks back with joyful mind to the testimony which he bore before the rulers of the Jews. He has borne it, and that a plain, straight-forward testimony: borne witness to this Man, Jesus of Nazareth, and testified that He is not merely Messiah, but also the Son of God. As if he would say: I have lived. My mission is in its substance accomplished (see Joh 3:29). Hence from that moment forth he points his disciples to Jesus.

DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL

1. Who art thou? Starke: Whether this question (of the Sanhedrin) was put sincerely, or hypocritically and with evil intent, is uncertain; but the latter is more probable. Others, however, think the former, since there are no indications that the delegation was sent out of mere envy, or with the design of questioning his office. Causes of the embassy: (1) Johns unusual sort of official work, in the wilderness preaching and baptizing, and the great gathering of the people to him. (2) The conviction, from many signs, that the time of the Messiah must be at hand. (3) The vehement longing of the Jewish people everywhere for the advent of the Messiah, especially by reason of their great oppression under the Roman power, etc., because they hoped the Messiah would erect again their fallen commonwealth, and because they did not yet imagine that the kingdom of the Messiah would turn to the prejudice of their prestige. Furthermore they must either not have known the origin and family of John, or must have been entirely foolish to suppose the Messiah could be born of the tribe of Levi.

2. The two testimonies of the Baptist form the contents of this section: Christ the Lord (the Old Testament manifestation of God, the Angel of the Lord, Jehovah): (1) Christ the Lamb of God (the Servant of God); (2) Christ the Son of God.

3. From the first testimony it is evident that Christ was accredited by John in an entirely official manner; in the second we see how Christ was accredited by John himself most distinctly by God. Likewise, that John points his disciples to Christ, and that every genuine fore-runner does the same, while the spurious fore-runners, the chief priests, keep their disciples to themselves.

4. On the import of the baptism of Jesus see the exegesis under Joh 1:32, and Com. on Matth. Joh 3:13, p. 76.

5. Between the 28th and 29th verses falls the close of the history of the temptation of Jesus, and with it the settlement of His Messianic calling or, as Reinhard puts it, His plan. He comes out of the wilderness with the clear sense of His destiny and His willingness to become the Lamb of God. This then the prophetic Baptist perceives in His appearance through the Spirit.
6. It is noticeable that the temptation of John by the Sanhedrin, and that of the Lord by Satan, coincides in time. The Baptist says: I am not the Christ; Jesus says: I am not the Christ according to the perverted antichristian hopes of the hierarchy, according to the notion of the ungodly world.
7. Gerlach: In the fact that he alone knew the Messiah, while the entire people and their rulers knew Him not, John would give them the credentials of his own prophetic mission.
8. The ultimate object of the mission of John the Baptist: To make Christ known by official, attestation according to the Old Testament law before the rulers of the Jews, by a testimony of the New Testament Spirit among His disciples. Malachi pointed to John (Elijah), John points to Christ, and thus the Messianic prophecy converges at last to the distinctness of an index finger.

HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL

See the Comm. on Mat 3:13-17; Mar 1:1-8; Luk 3:1-22. The temptation of John and the temptation of Christ. The first and last temptation of John, and the first and last temptation of Christ.Who art thou? or, the perfect ignorance of a hardened, formal spirituality before living spirits.No, and again no! or, how the spirit of John refuses to suit the forms of the Pharisees.The great two-fold testimony of the Baptist concerning Christ: (1) The same both in public and in the confidential circle; (2) varying in form: in its legal office before the Jewish rulers describing Christ as the eternal Lord, and in its spiritual office in the circle of disciples describing Christ as the Lamb of God.The denials of John and the denials of Christ as against the current notions of Elijah and Christ, a proof that between the spirit of Holy Scripture itself and the exegesis of a traditional hierarchical theology there is an immense difference.The lessons of the connection between Johns humble knowledge of himself and his knowledge of Christ.John, as a witness of his own knowledge of Christ, free and open, yet also wisely reserved (1) in reference to what he knew of Christ (speaking to the unsusceptible only of the Lord, to the susceptible, of the Lamb of God); (2) in reference to how be knew it: showing to the one company only that he knows Christ, to the other, how he came to know him.The self-denial of John the true confession, as an example to us: (1) The true confession of Christ; (2) the true confession of himself.John and the Pharisees, or the servant of the law of God and the men of human commandments (the man of the law and the men of traditions).The Baptist, as Gods prophet, consistent with himself, and therefore one thing to the Pharisees, another to his disciples.The glory of Christ in the light of the human and the divine nature: (1) High as heaven above the Baptist; (2) one with the Father in the Holy Ghost,The word: I have borne witness, is equivalent to: I have lived: (1) In the mouth of the Baptist; (2) in the mouth of the Lord (the true witness); (3) in the mouth of every believer.The Lamb and the Dove, or, the sensible signs of the kingdom of heaven (1) in the lamb and in all silent, devout passiveness of nature; (2) in the dove and in all pure, beautiful joyousness of nature.[The lamb, the pure and gentle beast of earth; the dove, the pure and gentle bird of heaven: Psa 85:10-11.]Christ the Lamb of God, who bears the sins of the world: (1) bears; (2) bears with; (3) bears away.The testimonies of the Baptist concerning Christ, at first apparently without effect, and afterwards of immeasurable, permanent power.Christ the centre of all testimonies of God: (1) The inexhaustibly and strongly Attested; (2) the inexhaustible and true Witness.The Pericope, Joh 1:19-28. The spiritual position of things at the advent of Christ in its permanent import: (1) The spiritual leaders of the people understand not the Baptist and know not Christ; (2) the Baptist preaches and testifies of Christ as a voice in the wilderness; (3) Christ fights out His victory in secret.John a pure prophetic character, the standard of value between the Pharisees and Christ: (1) As compared with the Pharisees, grandly exalted; (2) as compared with Christ, small, even to the deepest self-humiliation.The mysteriousness of the testimony of the Baptist: (1) The mysteriousness in the testimony itself; (2) the mysterious features in the attested One; (3) the mysterious intimation of his work.

Starke:Before persons whose candor and fear of God we should most trust, we are many a time most on our guard.Wo to the city and to the country whose watchmen are blind.Canstein: Christians in general, and preachers in particular, should not arrogate to themselves what belongs to Christ, but point their hearers away from themselves and to Christ, to look for all their salvation from Him.Hedinger: No one may take to himself credit, or receive praise beyond due measure and contrary to humility, 2Co 10:13.In calling himself a voice, he not only hints that his preaching is from heaven, but also that in him nothing is to be honored save his voice, nay, that all he is, is, as it were, nothing but voice.Canstein: We have to do not with the person (humanly taken), but with the matter itself.Cramer: Spare neither friends nor foes to confess the truth.Jesus is in the midst of us, though we see Him not.Osiander: To the minister of the church it belongs to preach and to administer the sacraments, but Christ gives the increase, and pours out the Spirit.Zeisius: A true teacher should, after the example of John, be well instructed, authenticated, and established.

Gerlach:The decisive self-denial of John in his relation to Christ gave and still gives the greatest weight to his testimony. This self-denial was and still is, to unbelief, incomprehensible; in this, that a man could so clearly know his mission and its limits.Braune: Whom John had announced as coming with axe, winnowing-fan, and fire, Him he now commended as the Lamb of God which taken away the sin of the world.

Heubner:On the rights of the magistracy in regard to religion.What privileges has the spiritual power?The limits of obedience.Who art thou? as it were the: Who is there? demanded of every one in the ministry of the kingdom of God.Tycho Brahes symbol: Esse Polius quam haberi.Christian self-valuation.Persius: Quem deus esse jussit, disce.Christian choices of calling.Assurance of an eternal mission.In John the testimony of the best and noblest of his time and of the ages before is set forth.Schleiermacher: The baptism of John stood in a manner between the law and the Gospel.Johns testimony concerning Christ a type of ours.Couard: An evangelical preacher will and must bear witness only of Christ.To what the question: Who art thou? would lead us, if put to ourselves.Rieger: John the model of an evangelical preacher.145

[Schaff:Behold the Lamb of God, Joh 1:20 (repeated Joh 1:36). (1) The person who speaks: John the Baptist, in the name of the whole Old Testament, responded to by the experience of the Christian believer. (2) The person spoken of: Christ, (a) compared to a lamb for His innocence and purity (a lamb without blemish and without spot, 1Pe 1:19), meekness, gentleness, and quiet submission, (as a lamb led to the slaughter, Isaiah 53); (b) called the Lamb foretold by the prophet Isaiah in that remarkable passage on the suffering Messiah, Isa 53:7. Comp. also the paschal lamb, the blood of which, being sprinkled on the door-post, saved the Israelites from the destroying angel (1Co 5:7), and the lambs of the daily sacrifices, Exo 29:38; (c) the Lamb of God, appointed and ordained by God from eternity, dedicated to God, and approved by God. (3) The office of Christ: to bear, and by bearing, i.e., by His propitiatory sacrifice, to take away the sin, the accumulated mass of the sins, of the world, i. e., of the entire human race (1Jn 2:12), consequently also my sins. (4) The exhortation Behold, with the eye of a living faith, which appropriates the atoning sacrifice of Christ.Augustine: How weighty must be the blood of the Lamb, by whom the world was made, to turn the scale when weighed against the world.Olshausen: The sacrificial lamb which bears the sin, also takes it away; there is no bearing of sin without removing the same.Ryle: The Lamb of God has made atonement sufficient for all mankind, though efficient to none but believers.Matthew Henry: John was more industrious to do good than to appear great. Those speak best for Christ that say least of themselves, whose own works praise them, not their own lips.The same: Secular learning, honor and power seldom dispose mens minds to the reception of divine light.J. C. Ryle, (abridged): The greatest saints have always been men of John Baptists spirit.; clothed with humility (1Pe 5:5), not seeking their own honor, ever willing to decrease if Christ might only increase. Hence God has honored and exalted them (Luk 14:11).Humility is the beginning of Christian graces.The learned Pharisees are examples of the blindness of unconverted men.Christ is still standing among multitudes who neither see, nor hear, nor believe. It will be better on the last day to never have been born, than to have had Christ standing among us without knowing Him.P. S.]

Footnotes:

[122]Joh 1:19.Codd. B. C *., Lachmann add . Not decisive. [. C.3 L. al., text, rec., Tischend., 8th ed., omit it. Alf., with Lachm., inserts it.P. S.]

[123]Joh 1:20). is the reading of the best MSS., . A. B.C*., L. X., Orig., Chrys., Cyr., Lachm., Tisch. (VIII. ed.), Alf., instead of . The former reading emphasizes , I for my part, and implies that John knew another who was the Messiah, while the latter reading emphasizes the negation: It is not I who, etc.P. S.]

[124]Joh 1:22.The after here is significant. Not, as by Lachmann according to B. C., to be omitted. [Cod. Sin. has it.]

[125]Joh 1:24.Tischendorf, after several codd. (A.* B.* C.* L.), omits the article before . As Origen supposed a second embassy, the omission may have arisen with him. [The Cod. Sinaiticus has a gap here, indicating the original presence of the article.E. D. Y.]

[126]Joh 1:26.A. B. C. L. [Cod. Sin.] read both times, instead of . The latter is probably exegetically the more accurate particle.

[127]Joh 1:27.The words and are wanting in B. and C. [Cod. Sin.] and in Origen. Bracketed by Lachmann, omitted by Tischendorf [and Alford]. The Johannean style is in favor of the first words; the connection with ., etc., is in favor of the others. Cod. A., etc., and the similar expression in Joh 1:15, are in favor of both.

[128]Joh 1:29.The Recepta reads , after Origen. Authorities decisive against it. [Comp. the note of Alford in loc.P. S.]

[129]Joh 1:29.Against the addition are A. B. C., etc. Meyer: Beginning of a church lesson. [Cod. Sin., a gap.E. D. Y.]

[130]Joh 1:28.[The E. V. follows the Vulgate: qui tollit. The Gr. verb has the double meaning to take up (to bear the punishment of sin in order to expiate it, comp. Isaiah 53.: he bore our griefs and carried our sorrows), and to take away (=). Both may be combined (as is done by Olshausen) and expressed by the German verb hinwegtragen, to bear away, to take away by taking upon ones self, or to remove the penalty of sin by expiation: See the Exeg. Notes. The present is used in prophetic vision of the act of atonement as a present and continuous fact.P. S.]

[131]Joh 1:31.[Some authorities insert here and in Joh 1:33 the article before , in the water (of Jordan) in which you see me baptize. Alford brackets, Tischend. (ed. VIII.) omits, Meyer (p. 112) defends it.P. S.]

[132]Joh 1:32.Most codd. read , not , which comes from Mat 3:16; Luk 3:22.

[133][So also Lcke, De Wette, Meyer, Wieseler, Ebrard, Luthardt, Godet, Alford, etc. Bengel infers from this passage that the preaching of the Baptist began not long before the baptism of Jesus; otherwise the embassy would have been sent earlier. Alford argues that it was absolutely necessary to suppose that John should have delivered this testimony often, and under varying circumstances, first in the form given by Luke: . . . ., and after it in this form, , where his former testimony is distinctly referred to.P. S.]

[134][Chrysostom, Jerome, Augustine and other fathers distinguished two Elijahs, corresponding to the two advents of Christ, 1) a man of the spirit and power of Elijah, i.e., John the Baptist; 2) Elijah the Tishbite, who shall precede as a herald the second or judicial coming of Christ. This view is adopted by Ryle, who thinks that John could not well have answered in the negative, if there is no literal fulfilment of Malachis prophecy in prospect. Trench (Studies in the Gospels, p. 214) leaves the question undecided.P. S.]

[135][Bengel: Omnia a se amolitur, ut Christum confiteatur et ad Christum redigat quxrentes. He turns all from himself, that he may confess Christ and bring the inquirers to Christ. This expresses the true character and mission of the Baptist. Comp. Joh 3:30.P. S.]

[136][The absence of a name is urged in favor of this interpretation.P. S.]

[137][Grotius, Kuinoel, Olsh. refer to Jeremiah.P. S.]

[138][Meyer (p. 108), on the contrary, takes here in the sense to take away, to abolish, but admits that this idea presupposes the idea of bearing (Das Hinwegnehmen der Snde von Seite des Lammes setzt das Aufsichnehmen derselben voraus). Dr. Langes view is more correct. In Isaiah 53., to which also Meyer refers the passage, the idea of expiatory bearing ( , LXX.: , , ) prevails. By assuming and bearing our sin, Christ has abolished it. His blood cleanseth from all sin, 1Jn 1:7.P. S.]

[139][This, with the article, forcibly presents the sins of the race as one fact. Christ bore the whole. Sin and the world, says Bengel, are equally wide. In Isa 53:6; Isa 53:8; Isa 53:12 the same singular number is used in the midst of plurals.P. S.]

[140][Comp. on this important and difficult passage Lcke, I. 401416, and Alford, who likewise refers the Lamb of God to the prophetic announcement in Isa 53:7, where it is connected with the bearing and taking away of sin. But this does not set aside the fact that Christ was indeed the true Paschal Lamb slain for us, 1Co 5:7. The passage is strangely misunderstood by the author of Ecce Homo. Ch. 1, who endeavors to explain it from the 23d Psalm, as describing a state of quiet and happy repose under the protection of the Divine Shepherd. The exegesis is the poorest part of this bookP. S.]

[141][, or as . reads, . Alford explains: I also, like the rest of the people, had no certain knowledge of Him. But here reassumes , Joh 1:30, and continues the narrative. See Meyer. John knew Jesus far better than the people (Mat 3:14), but in comparison with his divine knowledge of inspiration received at the baptism of Christ, his former human knowledge of conjecture dwindled into ignorance.P. S.]

[142][Augustine urges simplicity as the tertium comparationis. The Holy Ghost, he says (as quoted by Wordsworth who does not refer to the place), then manifested Himself as a Dove,and, at the day of Pentecost, in tongues of fire: in order that we may learn to unite fervor with simplicity and to seek for both from the Holy Ghost.P. S.]

[143]After the martyrdom of Polycarp a dove arose from the ashes of the martyr.

[144][The last view is sufficiently refuted by , which could never be said of the Spirit. Comp. Meyer, p. 115.P. S.]

[145][Several commonplace extracts or mere repetitions and themes of sermons have been omitted in this section.P. S.]

Fuente: A Commentary on the Holy Scriptures, Critical, Doctrinal, and Homiletical by Lange

The Record of John

Joh 1:19-20

The John spoken of in the text is John the Baptist. John who writes the text is John the Evangelist. It is a peculiarity of John’s Gospel that throughout he deals almost exclusively, though there are special exceptions, with the spiritual ministry of Jesus Christ the Son of God. The other evangelists treat very prominently of the miracles and the more public ministry of the Saviour. But the evangelist John seems to know the heart of Jesus Christ. John was the spiritual evangelist; he had keen, spiritual eyes. True, indeed, he saw all the miracles of an outward and public kind that Jesus Christ did, but he seemed to make a special note of those spiritual miracles which deal more directly with the heart and the conscience, the inner life, and the secret motives of men. You will find somewhat of my meaning from the structure of the preface to his Gospel, which we have in this opening chapter. Matthew and Luke proceed to trace out the history of Jesus Christ from the human side; they show how he came into the world, through what genealogical line he found his way amongst the sons of men. But John takes another course altogether. Instead of writing a genealogical table, showing us the whole human ancestry of the Son of God, he says, with the abruptness of sublimity, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” The other evangelists seemed to bring Jesus Christ up from the earth; John opens heaven, and reveals his glory from on high. This is the key of the whole gospel; it is preeminently a spiritual revelation; it deals with the inner life of things. He who is the master of the Gospel by John is a refined and learned scholar in the school of Christ. There is very little outwardness in the statements of John; he does refer again and again to miracles, but more frequently he speaks from the interior life of the Saviour, and shows us the meaning of the truth and the grace that are in Christ Jesus. This we shall see more clearly as we pursue our way from the text which is now under consideration.

John the Baptist was preaching. A deputation was sent from Jerusalem to wait upon him, to put to him this question, “Who art thou?” He had been creating a great sensation; all the people for miles round about had been crowding to his ministry; he had excited very great interest and expectation, and people were looking out for some startling and marvellous event. John received the deputation, heard their inquiry, and when he listened to it he passed through the hour of his temptation. Is it a little thing to have a deputation waiting upon you from the capital in whose heart there is evidently a very special expectation? Is it a little thing to hear the members of the deputation say, “Who art thou?” in a tone which seems to imply, “We shall not be surprised if thou dost reveal thyself as the very light we have been expecting!” A temptation was brought thus to bear upon John. The people would have returned to those who sent them, and would have said, “Yes, this is the man; this is the realisation of all the ancient prophecies; he has come at last; his name is Messias, Son of God, King of the Jews.” How did John meet the temptation? “He confessed, and denied not; but confessed, I am not the Christ.” The wonder of those who waited upon him was increased. Who was he, then? That he was some great man could not be doubted, so they proceeded to say, “What, then, art thou Elias?” and he said, “I am not.” “Art thou that prophet?” and he answered, “No.” He did not at once reveal who he was, but allowed these people to pursue their inquiries for a time. He baffled them, and kept them at arm’s length. It is in the same way we ourselves are treated in some such manner, now and again, even in our highest inquiries. We receive negatives, and not affirmatives, as answers. Instead of having a revelation made clear, distinct, and final, we are tempted to go further, and to repeat our inquiries in various forms. Thus God puts us under a process of training by not answering at once the inquiries with which we besiege him. Blessed is the man who will pursue his inquiry until he reaches the truth, who finds in all the answers of God licenses to ask again, to put up some other prayer, to shape his heart’s wish into some other form. For truly, God is thus training the man to have a wise and understanding heart.

John knew who he was. That is one of the main points every man ought to understand about himself. He ought to be able to say who he is, what he has been called to do, what he is qualified to perform. Because a man who may have great power within a given compass may have only to step beyond the line of his limit to be utterly weak and useless. Do we know ourselves? Do we know the measure of our strength? Do we work within the compass that God has assigned us; or are we wasting our strength in those foolish ambitions which tempt us away from proper limitations and mock us, throwing us back and back again into the dust, so that at the end of the day a man who might have done some solid and substantial work in life has done nothing but follow the vagaries of a useless and mortifying ambition, and will leave the world without having done it any good? The Church ought to know what it is; the Church ought to understand its limitations. Every minister ought to know who he is, and what he is called to do. The moment a man usurps anything that does not belong to him he loses power, and the moment the Church lays claim to anything that does not fairly come within its possession as determined by Christ, that Church goes down in its best influence. “Who art thou?” If he had said, “I am the Christ,” he would have won a moment’s victory, but he would have opened up to himself a most ignominious and humiliating destiny. Who art thou, O man? what canst thou do? what is the purpose of God as revealed in thy life? Art thou great? art thou little? art thou intended for public life? art thou meant for private ministry? What is thy place? what is thy calling in life? Let a man understand this clearly, and work according to a devout conviction, and his life cannot be spent in vain. But let this temptation once seize a man, “I could be as great as Elias has been; I think I have within me the spirit of that prophet referred to so often in the Old Testament”; let a man extend himself ambitiously beyond his proper function and calling in life, and the result will be self-mortification, ignominy, and shame; and he who might have done something really good and useful, will go out of the world having misspent his little day.

What is true of individual men is true of the whole Church. When a man says, “I am Christ,” he lies. When a man says, “I claim infallibility,” he touches the highest point of blasphemy. When a man at Rome, or in London, or elsewhere, says, “I am as God upon the earth,” he knows not himself; he has committed the most grievous sin, though there be upon his lips the holiest of names. I wish to be emphatic upon this; I wish every man amongst us to know himself, to understand what he is, and then, though he cannot say in reply to the inquiry, “Art thou some great one?” “Yes;” yet, if he can say that he is sent of God to do the humblest work in the world, he is great in his degree, and shall have promotion and rulership in the world that is to come. Look at John; see how the great men crowd around him; hear what temptation they suggest to him. It had never occurred to John himself, in all probability, that he was Elias, that he was “that prophet,” that he was some great one. So the suggestion comes to him with all the force of a subtle temptation. What does he answer? He says, “I am the voice of one crying in the wilderness, Make straight the way of the Lord.” That was his answer. What did he say of himself? “I am a voice.” What did he say of his ministry? “I am sent to prepare the way of the Lord in the attention and the affections of the world.” Thus, he who had offered to him by a very subtle temptation a brilliant crown and a high throne said, “No; I am but a voice; I am not the expected One; clearly understand my ministry and function in life; I am the herald, not the King: I blow the blast of the trumpet, and he himself will be here presently.” That is just what every Christian has to do; to go before, to proclaim the Lord, to call men to preparedness, to awaken their attention, to tell them to be ready: for the Bridegroom cometh, and then to stand out of the way, as those who have indeed done a humble, yet a most useful work, in the world. But I repeat, he who knows his strength as John knew it will be strong, as no man can be who imagines himself to have a power with which God never invested him. A stern, solemn, grand man was John. He would receive no compliments; he would take nothing that did not belong to him of right. He was asked why he performed the office of baptism if he was not the Christ, nor Elias, neither that prophet. John answered and said, “I baptise with water; but mine is a merely introductory ceremony, I am only giving you types, and showing you hints of things; the real work has yet to be done, the inward spiritual change has yet to be wrought in the hearts of men. This poor water, this shallow river, I use as indicative of the great fact that man needs an inward change. As for this baptism, it does nothing towards the removal of your sins, but it offers an opportunity of saying, ‘We are sinners; we would be saved; we would repent; we would be born again.'”

After this there came in his speech a beautiful sentence: “There standeth one among you, whom ye know not; he it is, who coming after me is preferred before me, whose shoe’s latchet I am not worthy to unloose.” Where was the expected one? Standing amongst the people. They were looking far away for the blessing promised to the world, and behold, that blessing was standing in their very midst. It is in this way that we miss many of the great revelations and wonderful presences that God sends down to cheer us and soothe us by gentle ministries. We are looking beyond; we are looking afar off; we think that our great blessings should come from some great distance. God says, “My child, they are under thy very hand; they are close beside thy footprints; the best blessings I can give thee may be had at once. Seek, and thou shalt find; knock, and it shall be opened unto thee; ask and have.” So throughout the whole of the revelations of God we are told that things precious to our best life are much nearer us than we imagine; that God is not a God afar off, but a God nigh at hand; that after all there is not some stupendous thing to be done on our behalf. We have but to open our eyes and we shall see the light; but to breathe our prayer, and all that is good for us will be done in our hearts. We have no long pilgrimages to make; no great penalties to undergo; no long-suffering and self-infliction and self-reproach and self-crucifixion to perform, in any outward sense of those terms. Christ has done the work for us; he is within reach of the prayer of our love; he is amongst us; he is nigh at hand. “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved.”

I believe that in talking thus I am speaking to a difficulty that does keep many persons back from the realisation of the very highest blessings of God. “There standeth one among you.” Blessings are nearer than you expect. There standeth one among you; but the angel is veiled. There standeth one among you; stretch not your necks as if looking beyond the hills; open your eyes as if expecting to see God at your very side, and the light of his countenance shall make day in your hearts. Have not some of us been doing some great thing, and looking to some great distance for the incoming of God into the human race and into our own hearts? There is nothing in the creation that is round about us that does not testify to the near presence of God.

Art thou looking for God coming far away from the east yonder, when the morning light shines? Be assured that he is in that bread, if it be but a crust that is on thy morning table. Do you expect God to come in thunder and lightning, and whirlwind, and stormy tempest, making the clouds the dust of his feet, and coming with the trumpet of the thunder and the shouting of angels? Behold, he is in that little spring of water at thy backdoor, he is round about thy bed; he is numbering the hairs of thy head; he is putting his hand upon the head of thy little child; he is doing home work; he is on thy table; round about thy couch; making steadfast thy feet in all thy paths, watching all thy going, observing thy down-sitting and thy uprising, thy going out and thy coming in. He hath beset thee behind and before, and he lays his hand upon thee. And yet thou art looking as though thou didst require some great telescope to see the distance of God, and even then thou dost expect but to see his hinder skirts. There standeth one among you whom ye know not; God is within whisper reach: he can hear every throb of the heart, he sees every tear that drops from the eye of penitence, and there is nothing that is hidden from the fire of his look. Believe this, and a great awe will descend upon thy life; believe this, and every mountain will be an altar, every star a door into heaven, every flower an autograph of God, and the whole scene of thy life shall be chastened and hallowed by a religious sense, and an assurance and consciousness that God is close at hand.

“The next day John seeth Jesus coming unto him, and saith, Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world.” This expression on the part of John the Baptist proves what I have said about the spirituality of the writings of John the evangelist. John the evangelist alone marks down this exclamation, he heard the spiritual words of the preacher. John the Baptist called the attention of the world to the great coming One. John the evangelist saw spiritual realities, whilst men of inferior mould were dealing with so-called facts and with the outwardness of things. It was John’s fine sense of hearing that caught this expression: “Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world.” If you will at your leisure compare the reports which are given of John the Baptist by the other evangelists, you will know what I mean by saying that John the evangelist caught the spiritual aspect of things, saw the inward, moral, spiritual intent of men who wrote and spoke, and who came as the special servants and ministers of God to the world. It will be easy for you to put together the conversations which would very likely take place regarding the preaching of John the Baptist. We have a record in Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. There will be no difficulty in piecing these reports, so as to get a tolerably correct idea of the conversations that preceded regarding this remarkable personage. To him none could show hospitality. His meat was locusts and wild honey; he had a leathern girdle about his loins; his home was the wilderness. He wanted none of your wine and your luxury; he did not accept invitations to the banqueting boards of men; he realised what is meant by the independence of poverty. As long as there was a locust he had a meal; as long as he could put his finger out to the wild honey he had enough. The blandishments and all the refinements and luxuries of the state that was near to him had no effect upon his ambition or upon his heart. He lived independently; you could take nothing from him, and he would not have anything added to him. Oh, it was a stern, solemn, terrible-looking life that; and his preaching was very like it, was it not? If we had only had the accounts of Matthew and Mark and Luke, we should have thought that the preaching was such as eminently befitted the preacher. Look at him there. Look at his long locks, at his leathern girdle, at his monastic face, at his rugged bearing, at his simple fare. He is standing there silently; when he speaks I wonder what such lips will say? Oh, they are terrible looking lips! When he shuts his mouth he seems to have made a resolution; when he closes those lips of his it seems as if he never would open them again but to curse the world! Listen! Have you heard this preacher named John this grim, weird man that rejects our approaches, and keeps us so much at arm’s length? Have you heard him? “Yes.” Can you quote anything he says? “Yes; I never heard so terrible a speaker as he is; he seems to cleave the air when he speaks. I heard him say, ‘His fan is in his hand, and he will throughly purge his floor!'” Have you heard him preach? “Yes; and never heard such a speaker before.” Can you quote anything he says? “Yes; he says, ‘The wheat he will gather into his garner; but the chaff he will burn up with unquenchable fire!'” Have you heard him preach? “Yes.” Can you quote anything that this wonderful man has said in his preaching? “Yes, I can.” What did he say? “He said, ‘The axe is laid to the root of the tree!'” And their report ends. Matthew, Mark, and Luke have each spoken to us, and there is an end of it. Was that preaching? Do such terrible sentences as these constitute preaching? “His fan is in his hand!” That is a threatening. “The axe is laid to the root of the tree!” That is a threatening. “The chaff he will burn up with unquenchable fire!” That is a threatening. An awful preacher! I expected as much; I thought he never could speak a gentle word; his voice could never subside into a minor tone. I turn over a page, and the page brings to me the report of John the evangelist. I inquire, “John the evangelist, have you heard your namesake the Baptist?” “Yes.” Can you quote anything from any one of his sermons? “Yes.” What? “Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world.”

Such are the different reports we may hear about a man’s preaching! Some people never hear the finer tones; some persons never hear the tenderer expostulations and messages of the speaker. They remember what he said about the fan and the axe, and the unquenchable fire; but the gentle gospel, the sweet, persuasive tone, the indicated Lamb of God, they think nothing of, they remember not; it seems to escape them altogether. This rugged preacher, with the voice of the whirlwind and a countenance grim to terribleness, was he who preached the most intensely evangelical, the most vital gospel sermon ever delivered by the lips of man or angel. “Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world.” Remember, John said that; remember, that is the upgathering of the revelation of God; remember, that to recollect everything else and to forget this, is to remember the shell and to forget the kernel, to remember the body and to forget the heart, to know the outside of things, and nothing of that inner spiritual reality which is the very joy of life. How beautifully it is put: “The Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world.” How it might have read! What a different expression it might have been! This would seem to have been more in harmony with the aspect of the speaker, and with all that was known about his way of livelihood. When he came out of the wilderness, having eaten the locusts and the wild honey, and girt his leathern girdle about him, and come forth amongst the people, I should have expected him to say this: “Behold the lions of the tribe of Judah that devoureth the sinners of the world!” I should have said, “Yes, that is a natural climax; that kind of expression seems to befit your mouth.” Instead of that he says, “Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world.” Not the sinners but the sin; not the offender but the offence. That is redemption. The other course would have been destruction. It is easy to destroy; it requires God to redeem. It is easy to strike: it requires infinite grace to heal. By one stroke of his lightning he could have taken away the sinners, but it required the blood of his heart to take away the sin. We are redeemed not with corruptible things as silver and gold, but with the precious blood of Jesus Christ, the Lamb of God I

Christ came to take away sin; we cannot take it away ourselves. If it required the divine intervention to take away sin, why should we be going to Abana and Pharpar, rivers of Damascus, when there is a fountain opened in the house of David for sin and for uncleanness? Why be wasting strength and mocking the heart when Jesus comes before us with the express purpose of taking away our sin? “Through this man is preached unto you the forgiveness of sins.” Here is the atonement, here is the sacrifice of the Son of God complete, sufficient, final. The priest himself becomes the victim. Great is the mystery of godliness! To have seen everything in life but the Lamb of God, is to have seen everything in life but the one thing worth seeing. To have beheld all sights of greatness and glory and beauty, and not to have seen the Lamb of God, is to have seen the light from the outside of the window, and not to have gone in and found rest and welcome and home!

Fuente: The People’s Bible by Joseph Parker

XXII

JOHN’S TESTIMONY TO JESUS, JESUS’ FIRST DISCIPLES AND HIS FIRST MIRACLE

Harmony pages 18-19 and Joh 1:19-2:11 .

The subject matter of this chapter is in John’s Gospel alone, Joh 1:19-2:11 . There are two places only, Bethany beyond Jordan and Cana of Galilee. The whole period of time is one week. Four consecutive days are specified and the seventh day. The very hour of one day is also given. The time of year is near the Passover, therefore in the spring (Joh 2:13 ), the first Passover in the ministry of Jesus. The important divisions of this chapter are (1) John’s testimony to Jesus, (2) the first disciples, and (3) the first miracle of Jesus.

This chapter commences a series of first things. The whole series comprises (a) John’s first testimony, (b) first disciples of Jesus, (c) first miracle, (d) first introduction of his mother in his public ministry, (e) first (and perhaps last) marriage attended by Jesus, (f) first residence in Capernaum, (g) first Passover, (h) first purgation of the Temple, etc.

The first scene is on the left or east bank of the Jordan. This we know from the word “beyond” as spoken from Aenon on the west bank, Joh 3:26 . There is a difference in text as to this first place. The common version, following later authorities, locates it at Bethabara. All the older manuscripts followed by the Canterbury revision, say that it was Bethany. If Bethany be the true text, it cannot be the Bethany near Jerusalem, mentioned in Joh 11:1 as the home of Lazarus, Mary, and Martha, but some now unknown locality in either Perea or Iturea. Bethany certainly suits the context and has the testimony of tradition. Such also is the testimony of Origen.

JOHN AS A WITNESS

One of the most important functions of John’s office was to bear witness to Jesus as the Christ. His whole mission was to prepare the way for him, to make ready a people for him and then to bear witness to him. The witness-bearing feature of John’s mission is particularly brought out and emphasized in the Fourth Gospel alone.

I will now give the outline of John’s work as a witness for Christ, from which any preacher may preach a sermon.

Text: Joh 1:6-7 .

Theme: John the Baptist a witness to Jesus as the Messiah.

Mat 3:11 ; Mar 1:7 ; Luk 3:16 give the testimony before he knew Jesus as the Messiah, as to the office, dignity, and work of the Messiah.

Office: “The Lord,” “The One coming after me,” “The Christ.”

Dignity: “One whose shoe latchet I am unworthy to unloose.”

Work: “Who baptizeth in the Holy Spirit and in fire,” separating the wheat from the chaff, determining and fixing the destiny of both.

Testimony as to purity and sinlessness (Mat 3:14 ): “I have need to be baptized of thee, and comest thou to me?” Testimony to the deputation from Jerusalem, Joh 1:15 ; Joh 1:19-28 ; Joh 5:32-33 ; as to his office and dignity.

Testimony to Jesus as the vicarious Lamb, bearing or taking away the sin of the world, as to his pre-existence, anointing by the Holy Spirit, as the baptizer in the Holy Ghost and as the Son of God (Joh 1:29-34 ).

Testimony to his own disciples that Jesus was the Lamb of God (Joh 1:35-37 ).

Testimony to a Jew (a) that Jesus was the bridegroom, (b) that he must increase, (c) that he was divine “come down from heaven,” (d) that he was sent of the Father, (e) that he speaketh the Father’s words, (f) that the Spirit was given without measure to him, (g) as to the filial object of the Father’s love, (h) that all things were given into his hands, (i) that he is the object of faith, (]) the source of eternal life, (k) that unbelief in him and disobedience to him bring instant, persistent and eternal wrath (Joh 3:22-36 ).

Resuming the discussion, let us look at John’s Bethany testimony.

The occasion of this testimony was the visit to John of a formal deputation from the Jerusalem authorities, the Pharisees, sent to ascertain from John himself Just who he was, what his mission and what his authority.

The fact that the authorities of Jerusalem deemed it important and necessary to take this step is remarkable evidence to the great impression which John’s early ministry had made on the public mind, and the direction of this impression shows how widespread was the expectation of a Messiah and how earnestly the restless and burdened Jews longed for deliverance from Roman oppression.

In a previous chapter has been shown the out-cropping and direction of this impression concerning John (Luk 3:15 ). Subsequent testimony shows how the public mind was similarly agitated about Jesus and his work (Luk 9:7-9 ; Mat 16:13 ). And still later, at the trial of Jesus, we find the Jerusalem authorities endeavoring to secure from Jesus by judicial oath his testimony concerning himself (Mat 26:63 ; Mar 14:60 f).

The earnestness of the inquirers is manifested by their many, rapid and searching questions: “Art thou the Christ? Who then? Elijah? That prophet? Why baptizeth thou then? What sayest thou of thyself?”

In John’s replies two things are most striking: first, he minifies himself; second he magnifies Jesus.

This suggests an important lesson to all preachers and indeed to all Christians: get behind, and not before the cross.

It also teaches that between the purest and greatest men on the one hand and Jesus Christ on the other, there is infinite distance, which establishes his divinity.

It is also quite important to note how clean and manifold is John’s testimony: (a) as to dignity of person (“shoelatchet,”) (b) his divinity and pre-existence (“from heaven,” “Son of God,”) (c) His vicarious mission, the object of faith, (d) his anointing (Messiah) and its fulness, “without measure.”

Testimony to his own disciples: (a) “Lamb of God,” (b) “Leave me . . . go to him.” Compare Joh 3:26 ; Mat 2:2-3 ; Mat 14:12 .

THE FIRST DISCIPLES OF JESUS These were John’s disciples. It proves that John had made ready a people for the Lord, thus fulfilling that part of his mission and also preparing the way. Cf. Act 1:21 f, which gives the successor to Judas. The names of first two are John and Andrew. The important lessons are: (a) If we know Jesus let us follow him, and (b) bring others to him. Then follows the case of Andrew and Peter. Here we have the change of Peter’s name from Simon to Cephas. (See the author’s sermon “From Simon to Cephas,” first book of sermons, p. 279). The case of Philip and Nathanael follows, showing the evidence on which Nathanael believed. This section closes with the angels ascending and descending upon the Son of man which is the antitype of Jacob’s ladder.

Now let us consider this passage more in detail. The first thought of the passage is a shepherd finding a sheep; Jesus is the shepherd and Philip the sheep. Jesus finds Philip. It is a wonderful thing when Jesus finds any of us. He came to seek us out; to find the lost. It is his great office, as the shepherd, to find that which was driven away, to find that which was lame; to seek it until he does find it, and then to bring it home again healed and saved. Such finding is an event. It is an event of a lifetime. But when he does find us it seems to us as if we had found him; and when we tell about it we don’t say, “Jesus found me;” we say, “I found Jesus.” That is as it appears to our consciousness. Speaking from our experience, we state it as if Jesus had been lost and we had found him. While history says, “Jesus found Philip,” Philip says, “We found him.” And we can understand how that is. If a child should lose himself in the woods, trying to find his father who had gone out hunting, and the father, returning home, should ascertain that the child was lost and go out to seek the child and search until he struck the trail of the little wanderer, and follow it until he at last discovered him, the true account would be that the father found the child. But the child would say, “I have found my papa at last.” Both have been seeking. They have been seeking each other. But in the experience of the child it will be as if he had found his father. So, whenever Jesus finds a lost soul, that lost soul which has also been searching in an aimless kind of way, searching and desiring that soul will look at its own experience and say, “I have found the pearl of great price. I have come upon it at last.” This paradox of experience runs all through our religious life human consciousness appearing to contradict both doctrine and fact. There are two parties, God and man; God working, man working; God seeking, man seeking; God finding, man finding. And if we should stand on the God side of it and shut ourselves up entirely to that, we can preach some very hard, but true, though one-sided doctrine; and if we stand on the man side of it and shut ourselves up to that, we can preach some very unsound doctrine.

Now, when Jesus finds anyone, and that one realizes that he is found of Jesus, then what? If Jesus has found us, and if we, looking at it from our own consciousness and experience, have found Jesus, then what? Oh, Christian, what? Here is the answer; Every one who has been found of Jesus must become a finder for Jesus; that is, just as soon as Jesus finds Andrew, Andrew finds Peter for Jesus. As soon as Jesus finds Philip, Philip finds Nathanael for Jesus. Whoever is found of Jesus becomes a finder for Jesus. What then must a Christian do? Find people for Jesus. Surely any little child can understand that. Every one whom Jesus finds becomes a finder for Jesus.

Having settled it that our mission as “found-ones” is also to find others for Jesus, now let us see if we can also learn, not only that we are to do this, but how we are to do it. And not only how we are to do it, but when we may know that we get to the end of our duty; that is, let us seek to find the limit of human endeavor and stop when we get there and not try to go beyond that. We have done much when we can ascertain the limit of human effort, and then don’t try to do what we cannot do and what we never were required to do. Therefore to find out the salient points of Christian duty, and the limit of human endeavor, is to settle a great many things. What is it then? As soon as Jesus found Philip, Philip determined somebody else should know about Jesus, so he exercised his mind. He reasoned within himself: “To whom shall I go and tell this? I must make a selection of somebody. I must begin somewhere. Well, there is one man that I think about Just now, a man named Nathanael. I will go and tell Nathanael about it.” So he proceeds to Nathanael and commences with the following clearly stated and comprehensively stated proposition: “We have found him of whom Moses in the law and the prophets did write. We have found him to be Jesus. We have found him to be Jesus of Nazareth. We have found him to be Jesus of Nazareth, reputed to be the son of Joseph. He is in Galilee. He is in Nazareth of Galilee. His name is Jesus. We have found that this man Jesus lives in Nazareth, is the one of whom Moses in the law and the prophets did write.”

Now that leads to the next point. When we go to find people for Jesus what kind of an argument had we best employ in endeavoring to get them to come to Jesus? This argument: “We have found him.” What is the import of that argument? That argument is our Christian experience. “Nathanael, we have found him.” It is a very simple argument, but it is very convincing. Now suppose Philip had said, “Nathanael, you ought to seek him of whom Moses in the law and the prophets did write.” “Where is he?” Nathanael would very properly reply, “Do you know?” “No.” “Do you know his name?” “No.” “How, then, are you going to guide me, since you are Just as ignorant as I am?”

Please notice this point, that whenever we go to find anyone for Jesus, whatever power we may have will be based upon the fact that we ourselves have found Jesus. “We speak that we do know, we testify that which we have seen.” We come to men, not with speculations, however fine spun; not with theories, however plausible; not with reasonings, however cogent, but as witnesses of a fact, saying, “Here is what I have experienced. I have felt this myself. I have tasted of this myself. I know whereof I affirm. I have found Jesus.”

The mightiest argument that the apostle Paul ever employed in his preaching was his own Christian experience. Whether he stood before Felix, Festus, Agrippa, or the Sanhedrin, his answer was one: “I will tell you what happened to me: I was on my way to Damascus on a certain occasion,” and then details how he found Jesus and how Jesus found him. Suppose there had been a tradition that in a certain section of a state, in the mountains somewhere, was a wonderful cave; the opening of it hard to find, but inside of it marvelous things to see; and many people had been for a long time trying to find it, and many very wise people had set up very plausible theories as to its locality, and each confident theorist should dogmatically insist that it ought to be and must be where his argument placed it. But in the midst of their disputations an ignorant Negro should appear and say, “I know it is not at any of those places, because I have found it and been in it.” And suppose that each learned disputant should demand that he should answer his argument locating it elsewhere. Would not the Negro say, “Master, I know nothing of argument, but I do know where the cave is. If you don’t believe me, come and see.” I venture to say that crowd would follow the Negro. If I had heard of a wonderful cave, or a gold mine, or any strange thing and desired to see it and a man should come to me, bearing honesty and frankness in his face, and say, “I have found it; I have seen it; I have been in it myself,” that would make an impression upon me. But if he were to say, “I want to present to you a line of argument to show you about where it must be,” that would not make much impression upon my mind. He is theorizing. He is doing no more than I might do; than ten thousand others have done. But whether he is a rustic or city man; whether he is a scholar or a boor, if he comes with an honest front and says, “I have found it,” that makes an impression.

What is our chief business? Finding people for Jesus. What is our chief argument in inducing people to come to Jesus? Testify that we have found him ourselves the power of our own Christian experience. Speak to them of a fact within our personal knowledge; speak of the precious thing within our own heart. There is our power in dealing with the world.

Now, as soon as we begin to tell about finding Jesus we will strike a difficulty. What is it? Some preconceived opinion in the mind of men is an obstacle in the way, and it does not make an atom of difference what it is) for if it is not in one thing it will be in another. Take, for example, this particular case: “We have found him of whom Moses wrote.” Nothing wrong there. “We have found him of whom the prophets wrote.” Nothing wrong there. “We have found him to be Jesus.” Nothing wrong there. “Of Nazareth,” ah, of Nazareth! “Now, I have a preconceived opinion about that.” What is that preconceived opinion? “No good thing can come out of Nazareth.” What an awful thing that preconceived opinion is! If we can establish the main point, first, the character of the person, “such as Moses wrote of, such as the prophets wrote of,” and if we can find the person himself Jesus why will one allow a preconceived opinion about locality to keep him from accepting him? But there stands that preconceived opinion: “Can any good thing come out of Nazareth?” Now the most ingenious device of the devil is his use of proverbs, either lying proverbs, or proverbs so misapplied that they are made to be lying proverbs, and that was one of them, that no good thing could come out of Nazareth.

The Old Testament does not mention Nazareth, nor does Josephus. Its bad reputation is to be gathered from the New Testament. There are two instances in the New Testament history that tell about its bad character, the incorrigible unbelief of its inhabitants and their cruelty when, first, they not only refused to hear Jesus, but sought to slay him by casting him over the face of the precipice, and then their later rejection of him caused him to change his place of residence. So he left Nazareth forever, and moved to Capernaum. They were a hard lot of people; that much was true. And now Nathanael asks: “Can any good thing come out of Nazareth?”

The place where a man has lived has a great deal to do with his opportunities of usefulness in after life, and the reputation of the place clings to him; but if he be in himself strong and true, and there be real power in him, he will be a man and make his mark, no matter where he hails from. But there was that preconceived opinion now. If it had been rightly considered, that objection was one of the demonstrations of the messiahship of Jesus Christ; that objection was one of the arguments in favor of him. The prophets had declared that he should be called a Nazarene. I do not mean to say that any prophet had specified Nazareth as his home, but more than one of the prophets had described him as “one who is despised,” and the word “Nazarene” was a term of contempt and reproach and is so used in the New Testament repeatedly. Yet that name which was a term of reproach became a name of glory. It was inscribed upon his cross: “Jesus of Nazareth,” and he himself avowed his connection with Nazareth after his resurrection, and “the sect of the Nazarenes” took the world. The Apostate Julian when dying is reported to have said, “Thou Nazarene, hath conquered.”

We meet some preconceived opinions in every man that we approach who is outside of Christ. He will spring some little point of objection. The ground in his mind is occupied, the preconceived opinion stands in his way. In other words, he has accepted a certain premise as established, and that premise being established in his mind, it keeps him from accepting any conclusion not deducible from it. Now what are we going to do when we strike a difficulty of that kind? Do not argue with that man; he will argue until doomsday. We need not scold; that won’t do any good. But we may propose to him this practical and experimental test: “Come and see.”

So as our business is to be a finder for Jesus, our argument must be that we have found him ourselves. When any sort of a preconceived opinion is given as an objection, our remedy for that preconceived opinion is the simple invitation to put the matter to a personal, practical test: “Come and see.” I don’t know any shorter or more efficient way to settle all doubt. It should not make any difference to us what is the character of any man’s objection to the Bible, what is the character of his objection to Jesus Christ as the Son of God, what is the mental difficulty or moral difficulty in his way, if he will only put it to a personal, practical test, we may have hope of him, and none under heaven unless he will. What is the next point? When we bring a man to Jesus that is the end of our work. We cannot convert a man not to save our life. That does not rest with us; that is not a part of our duty; we have reached our limit when we have brought him to Jesus. He will attend to his part of it. And yet how many of the human family have been devoted to doing God’s work men trying to make Christians out of other men, and giving formulas for it, and prescribing rites by which it is to be accomplished a certain form of words to be pronounced! I say our limit is reached when we have brought that man to Jesus; and the sooner we find that out the better. God alone can forgive sins. It is blasphemy for any man to claim that power. When they took a bed up, on which a man with the palsy was lying, and when they had exhausted their efforts to get in through the door and could not, and then climbed up on the house and took up the tiles of the roof and let him down before Jesus, their work was done. They could not cure the palsy. They brought him to Jesus and stopped. That is the limit of our work.

Let us restate: The points are very simple. If we have been found of Jesus, then our chief mission is to be finders for Jesus, and our chief argument in bringing people to Jesus is the fact that we have found Jesus ourselves; that is, our Christian experience; and as a remedy against any objection in the way of a preconceived opinion on the part of the one that we are trying to lead to Jesus, we are to use no argument, no scolding, but simply “Come and see.” “Let him that heareth say, some.” Oh, that power of such witnessing cannot be attained by any sort of argument in which we might be pleased to indulge!

The reader may recall a touching poem in McGuffey’s old Fourth Reader. It tells a sad and tragic story of a bride who, in all the loveliness of youth and beauty, just after the marriage ceremony, turns for a moment from the happy bridegroom and, looking back with eyes full of love’s sweet light, disappears through the doorway, never to be seen again. And the reader may recall the poet’s description of her father, representing him as one always looking for, and never finding his missing child. Looking in every room, over all the grounds, the suddenly demented mind always searching, never finding. So is the sinner. There is an unrest, an anxious void, a felt need of obtaining something he knows not what, for which he is ever seeking but which he has never found, something that will give even peace to his soul.

Let us look for a moment at that fig tree incident. It is not clearly stated why he went out to that tree; but it is very clearly implied that this was a private place. A man sitting under his own vine and fig tree, secluded from the world. Perhaps in his garden, where, sheltered from every eye, he could be alone; and out there alone, he kneels down to pray, and express his wants, and gives voice to his desires, and manifests his unrest and longing of his soul. No human eye is on him. He is alone. But the eye of Jesus is on him. That is the very thing that made Nathanael believe that he was the Messiah; because, hidden from human observation, in the secrecy of his most private devotion, here is one who reads every thought of his heart, and registers every index of his character. “Whence knowest thou me? How knowest thou that my heart is sincere, without any guile?” “I read your heart, Nathanael, when you were praying alone.” So he sees us in the privacy of our closet when the door is shut. He knows whether we are in earnest, or merely affecting an interest we do not feel. He knows when we come from curiosity. How readily he discovers to Ezekiel the character of his hearers: “Also, thou son of man, the children of thy people still are talking against thee by the walls and in the doors of the houses and speak one to another, every one to his brother, saying, Come, I pray you, and hear what is the word that cometh forth from the Lord. And they that come unto thee as the people cometh, and they sit before thee as my people, and they hear thy words, but they will not do them; for with their mouth they show much love, but their heart goeth after their covetousness. And, lo, thou art unto them as a very lovely song of one that hath a pleasant voice, and can play well on an instrument; for they hear thy words, but they do them not.” Such discernment of the heart is within the power of God alone. It convinced the woman of Samaria at the well that Jesus was the Messiah. So it satisfied Nathanael, evoking his ready response: “Rabbi, thou art the Son of God; thou art the King of Israel.” Whoever comes without guile, comes with a true and worthy purpose; coming to find that man will believe on the very first clear proof. And after all, whenever any man is convinced, it is but one proof that convinces; and, indeed, we never need but one good reason for anything. One good proof is sufficient.

And now here is my last point: While it is true that one who comes without guile, not to argue, not to satisfy curiosity, not to be entertained, but conscious of need, desiring to find a Saviour, finds it easy to believe, and while one proof satisfies the soul, yet he does not suffer that faith to rest always on that one proof, but ever confirms it by new and greater proof. So reads the passage: “Jesus answered and said unto him, Because I said unto thee, I saw thee under a fig tree) believest thou? Thou shalt see greater things than these. And he saith unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Hereafter ye shall see heaven open, and the angels of God ascending and descending upon the Son of man.” This is not “you shall see heaven opened;” it has long been open; but “you shall see an open heaven.” It is not that it is now to open, but that it has been open, and you did not heretofore see it. “You accepted as a proof of my divinity that I could read the heart. Here is proof mightier than that proof that reaches from high heaven down to earth; proof that reaches from the very throne and heart of God. Proof which says, Angels coming down en me; therefore, I am divine. There is a way from me to heaven, therefore, I am divine. I am the Messiah, the one who brings heaven and earth together. My right hand is on the throne, my left hand is on the sinner.” We shall see it, if, without guile, honestly coming, we accept the Lord Jesus Christ as the Son of God. Yes, heaven was already open over sleeping Jacob in the beginning of his religious life and over dying Stephen before he fell asleep in Jesus. Here I am a witness and not a theorist. To me, by faith) has that open heaven long been visible. By faith I have seen the angels ascending and descending upon the Son of God. It is no distempered fancy, no freak of the imagination, but a sweet and substantial reality. As, like Jacob, I have seen that gate of heaven and found in lonely places the house of God, and in my travels have met the “hosts of heaven,” so when, like Stephen, I come to die, whenever and wherever and however that may be, I, too, shall be able to “look up stedfastly into heaven and see the glory of God, and Jesus standing on the right hand of God” to receive and welcome my spirit. Yes, God will confirm our faith by even greater proofs. Angela will come down to us in our sorrows. They will minister to us as heirs of salvation. And when, like Lazarus at the rich man’s gate, our bodies die, they will catch away our parting souls and convey them to our heavenly home.

On page 19, Section 19 (Joh 2:1-11 ), of the Harmony we have an account of the first miracle of Jesus. At this point in our studies it is fitting that we should take a general view, somewhat, of the miracles which occupy an important place in the Bible. The names used to describe miracles, according to their effect on the beholder, their design, their source, or the thing accomplished, are wonders, signs, powers and mighty works, respectively. See Act 2:22 ; 2Co 12:12 ; 2Th 2:9 , e. g., the incarnation of Christ, the healing of the paralytic (Mar 2:12 ), the raising of Lazarus, and the resurrection of Christ. The following are some definitions of a miracle:

“A miracle is an effect in nature not attributable to the ordinary operations of nature, nor to the act of man, but indicative of superhuman power, and serving as a sign or witness thereof; a wonderful work, manifesting a power superior to the ordinary forces of nature.” Century Dictionary.

“A miracle is a transgression of a law of nature by a particular volition of the Deity, or by the interposition of some invisible agent.” Hume.

“A miracle is an event or effect contrary to the established constitution and course of things, or a deviation from the known laws of nature; a supernatural event, or one transcending the ordinary laws by which the universe is governed.” Webster.

“A miracle is an extraordinary event, discernible by the senses, apparently violating natural laws and probabilities, inexplainable by natural laws alone, produced by the agency of a supernatural power, for religious purposes, usually to accredit a messenger or to attest God’s revelation to him.” The Author.

It needs to be emphasized in this connection (1) that a miracle is not a violation of natural law, (2) not a greater power, but a different and particular method and (3) not a disregard of natural law, but it is superhuman and may come from God or the devil (2Th 2:9-10 ). If it comes from God it corroborates that which is good; if from the devil, that which is evil. True religion rests on divine revelation. ID the beginning man dealt directly with God and God sufficiently revealed his divinity and the vital principles of religion. But the devil approached man through an accredited intermediary. The miracle should not have been accepted as proof, because the alleged message was contrary to what had been revealed by God directly. (See Deu 13:3 ; Gal 1:8 ; Mat 24:24 ; 2Th 2:9 ; Rev 13:13 .) After man’s fall God could reveal himself only through an intermediary, hence the necessity of miracles. So man has neither warrant nor power to invent or impose a religion. Whatever claims to be a religion (a) must harmonize with previous revelation and nature, and (b) the messenger must be accredited and the message must be attested, as in the case of Jonah.

There are certain tests which must be applied to every miracle before we can know whether it is from God or from the devil. If from God, it must (1) not be immoral, (2) not a mere freak in nature, but it must (3) aim at that which is good, (4) result in good, and (5) establish right doctrine. So John says, “Try the spirits.” Therefore Moses, the elders and Pharaoh had a right to test the miracles they witnessed. (See Interpretation, volume, Exodus-Leviticus.)

There are three great groups of miracles in the Bible, each showing the intervention of God in a great crisis in the history of the true religion: (1) In the time of Moses; (2) In the time of Elijah and Elisha; (3) In the time of Christ and his apostles. The third group, which we are now to study, may be classed as follows: those wrought on Christ, such as (a) his incarnation, (b) the descent of the Spirit upon him, (c) the transfiguration, (d) the voice of Joh 12:28 , (e) the events of Gethsemane, (f) the events of the crucifixion, (g) his resurrection. Those wrought by him, beginning at Cana of Galilee and ending with the inspiration of the apostles (these we will study in order). Those wrought by his apostles which we find mainly in the book of Acts and will be considered in the interpretation of that book. If we admit the incarnation, all the others follow. The test miracle is the resurrection of Christ. He made it the test, his disciples accepted it as the test, and they ever afterward rested everything on it. (See 1Co 15 .)

Now we will take up this first miracle and discuss it briefly. The time was the third day after our Lord’s interview with Nathanael. The place was Cana of Galilee. The occasion was a marriage to which our Lord and his disciples were invited. The incident leading to it was the failure of the wine, upon which the mother of Jesus intervenes and states the case. The Romanists set great store by this incident as teaching the mediatorial position of Mary, but there is not a hint at such teaching in this miracle. The story of the miracle is simple and impressive. The water turned to wine. As Milton says, “The unconscious water saw its God and blushed.” The whiskey men try to find in this incident a justification for their nefarious business, but the ground of their justification in this passage is the sinking sand of delusion, and their claim is as utterly false as is the claim of the Romanists for the mediatorial work of Mary based upon the same incident. This miracle manifested the glory of Christ and strengthened the faith of his disciples. The purpose of this miracle as viewed by John was to attest the divinity of Jesus Christ. Thus he uses the word “sign” for this great event, which word is most common with him, and indicates the purpose of his gospel, viz: to prove that Jesus is the Christ.

QUESTIONS

1. In what Gospel is the subject matter of this chapter?

2. What two places are named?

3. What was the period of time, what points of time mentioned, and what the time of the year?

4. What are the important divisions of this chapter?

5. What are the “first-things” in the whole series introduced by this chapter?

6. What is the first scene, where and what the proof?

7. What was one of the most important functions of John the Baptist and what was his whole mission?

8. Where is the witness-bearing feature of his mission brought out?

9. What was the testimony of John to Jesus before he knew him as the Messiah?

10. What was his testimony to the purity and sinlessness of Jesus?

11. What was his testimony as to his office and dignity?

12. What was his testimony as to his vicarious work, his pre-existence, his anointing, etc.?

13. What was his testimony to him as the Lamb of God?

14. What was the bundle of testimony to Jesus in Joh 3:22-36 ?

15. What was the occasion of the Bethany testimony?

16. What was the significance of this event?

17. Show the progress of the concern of the authorities relative to the ministry of John and Jesus,

18. How is their earnestness manifested here?

19. What two striking things in John’s replies?

20. What lesson suggested to all preachers and Christiana by this attitude of John?

21. What additional lesson does this testimony of John teach?

22. How is the clearness of his testimony marked?

23. What was John’s testimony to his own disciples?

24. How were John and Jesus related in their work, and what things in general, to be noted in Joh 1:35-51 ?

25. Taking this passage more in detail, what was the first thought and what its application?

26. What is the duty of every one who has been found by Jesus and how is it illustrated here?

27. How then are we to do this and what important fact to be learned here?

28. What is the argument to be used, how illustrated here and how illustrated by Paul?

29. Give the author’s illustration.

30. What difficulty is often found in this work and how is it illustrated here?

31. What of the character and reputation of the people of Nazareth and what reference to it here?

32. What are we to do with the man with preconceived opinions?

33. Where does our work in the salvation of people end, and how is it illustrated in the Bible?

34. What is the lesson from the fig tree incident here?

35. What is the meaning of “in whom is no guile”?

36. How does Jesus confirm the faith of them that receive him?

37. Explain the “Jacob’s Ladder” antitype here.

38. What were the names used to describe miracles and what their meaning, respectively?

39. Give the definition of miracle according to the Century Dictionary.

40. Give Hume’s definition.

41. Give Webster’s definition.

42. Give the author’s definition verbatim.

43. What things need to be emphasized in this connection?

44. What are the two sources of miracles and what is the distinguishing characteristics in general?

45. On what does true religion rest, and what is its bearing on the question of miracles?

46. What was the first miracle, what was its purpose, what was the proof that it should not have been received as proof?

47. What of the necessity of miracles after the fall of man and what was its bearing on the question of man-made religions?

48. What are the tests of true religion?

49. What are the tests of a God-given miracle?

50. What are the three great groups of miracles in the Bible and why did they come as they did?

51. What is the classification of the third group and what is included in each class?

52. What miracle admitted and all others follow?

53. What was the time, place, and occasion of and the incident lead ing to the first miracle of Jesus?

55. What was the Romanist teaching based on this incident and how do you meet it? . 56 Tell the story of the miracle, giving quotation from Milton.

57. What use do the whiskey men make of this incident and how do you offset their contention?

58. What was the effect of this miracle?

59. What was its purpose?

60. What word did John moat frequently use for miracle and what the significance of his use of it?

Fuente: B.H. Carroll’s An Interpretation of the English Bible

19 And this is the record of John, when the Jews sent priests and Levites from Jerusalem to ask him, Who art thou?

Ver. 19. Jews sent priests ] Whose proper office it was to inquire into new doctrines, and by preserving, to present knowledge to the people, who were to “seek the law at the priest’s mouth,” Mal 2:7 . Cicero complains of his Roman priests, that they were good honest men, but not very skilful. Bonos illos quidem viros, sed certe non pereruditos. (Cic. xx. de. Fin.) And Varro upbraids them with their ignorance of much about their own gods and religions. (Aug. Civ. Dei. iv. 1.)

Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)

19 28. ] The first witness borne by John to Jesus: before the deputation from the Sanhedrim .

Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament

19. ] is the predicate, the subject, in the present form of the sentence. So very frequently in St. John, where commonly the mistake is made of supposing the demonstrative pronoun to be the subject, whereas it is ever the predicate of identification. Euthym [25] , , . . . .

[25] Euthymius Zigabenus, 1116

] John alone of the Evangelists uses this expression; principally as designating the chiefs of the Jewish people , the members of the Sanhedrim. It is an interesting enquiry, what this usage denotes as to the author or date of our Gospel. Prof. Bleek, Beitrge, pp. 245 249, has satisfactorily shewn that no inference can be deduced from it against the Jewish origin of the author, as Bretschneider and Fischer endeavoured to do: but it is rather confirmatory of the belief that the Gospel was written after the Jews had ceased to be politically a nation, and among Gentiles; the author himself contemplating these last as his readers.

. does not belong to ., nor to . . ., but to : sent from Jerusalem priests, &c.: so , Act 7:12 ; Act 11:22 alli [26] .

[26] alli = some cursive mss.

. . .] This was a formal deputation; priests and Levites, constituting the two classes of persons employed about the service of the temple (see Jos 3:3 ), are sent ( Mat 21:23 ) officially to enquire into the pretensions of the new Teacher ( Joh 1:25 ), who had collected about him such multitudes ( Mat 3:5 ), and had awakened popular expectation that he was the Messiah ( Luk 3:5 ).

; with reference to the popular doubts respecting him; asked in an unbelieving and inquisitorial spirit, compare Mat 3:7 ff., which had already taken place. Even among the learned, as well as among the people, there were considerable differences as to the prophecies respecting the Messiah: see ch. Joh 7:40-52 .

Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament

19 2:11. ] INTRODUCTION OF CHRIST TO THE WORLD: BY THE WITNESS OF JOHN ( Joh 1:19-40 ): BY HIMSELF ( Joh 1:41 to Joh 2:11 ).

Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament

Joh 1:19-42 . The witness of John and its result .

Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson

Joh 1:19-28 . The witness of John to the deputation from Jerusalem, entitled . The witness or testimony of John is placed first, not only because it was that which influenced the evangelist himself, nor only because chronologically it came first, but because the Baptist was commissioned to be the herald of the Messiah. The Baptist’s testimony was of supreme value because of (1) his appointment to this function of identifying the Messiah, (2) his knowledge of Jesus, (3) his own holiness, (4) his disinterestedness. , this which follows, is the testimony given on a special occasion , “when the Jews sent to him from Jerusalem priests and Levites”. [ ], originally designating the tribes of Judah and Benjamin which formed the separate kingdom of Judah, but after the exile denoting all Israelites. In this Gospel it is used with a hostile implication as the designation of the “entire theocratic community as summed up in its official heads and as historically fixed in an attitude of hostility to Christ” (Whitelaw). Here “the Jews” probably indicates the Sanhedrim, composed of priests, presbyters, and scribes. , the higher and lower order of temple officials (Holtzmann). Why were not scribes sent? Possibly because John’s father was himself a priest. The priests were for the most part Sadducees, but John tells us this deputation was strong in Pharisees (Joh 1:24 ). Lampe says: “Custodibus Templi incumbebat, Dominum Templi, cujus adventum exspectabant, nosse”. They were sent , “that they might interrogate him,” not captiously but for the sake of information. Lk. tells us (Joh 3:15 ) that the people were on the tiptoe of expectation, and were discussing whether John were not the Christ; so it was time the Sanhedrim should make the inquiry. “The judgment of the case of a false prophet is specially named in the Mishna as belonging to the council of the Seventy One” (Watkins). “This incident gives a deep insight into the extraordinary religious life of the Jews their unusual combination of conservatism with progressive thought” (Reynolds’ John the Baptist , p. 365). , “Who art thou?” Not, what is your name, or birth, but, what personage do you claim to be, what place in the community do you aspire to? with an implied reference to a possible claim on John’s part to be the Christ. This appears from John’s answer, . Schoettgen says the form of the sentence is “judaico more,” citing “Jethro confessus, et non mentitus est”. Cf. Rom 9:1 and 1Ti 2:7 . The iteration serves here to bring out the earnestness, almost horror, with which John disclaimed the ascription to him of such an honour. His high conception of the office emphasises his acknowledgment of Jesus. , here, as commonly, “recitative,” serving the purpose of our inverted commas or marks of quotation. , the reading adopted by Tisch [28] and W.H [29] , bringing the emphasis on the “I”. “ I am not the Christ,” but another is. The T.R. , by bringing the and together, accentuates the incongruity and the Baptist’s surprise at being mistaken for the Christ. This straightforward denial evokes another question (Joh 1:21 ), ; which Weiss renders, “What then art thou?” Better “what then?” “what then is the case?” quid ergo, quid igitur? ; If not the Christ Himself, the next possibility was that he was the forerunner of the Messiah, according to Mal 4:5 , “Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the Lord”. [Among the Fathers there seems to have been a belief that Elias would appear before the second Advent. Thus Tertullian ( De anima , 50) says: “Translatus est Enoch et Elias, nec mors eorum reperta est, dilata scilicet. Caeterum morituri reservantur, ut Antichristum sanguine suo exstinguant.” Other references in Lampe.] But to this question also John answers , because the Jews expected Elias in person, so that although our Lord spoke of the Baptist as Elias (Mat 17:10-13 ), John could not admit that identity without misleading them. If people need to question a great spiritual personality, replies in their own language will often mislead them. Another alternative presented itself: ; “art thou the prophet?” viz. , the prophet promised in Deu 18:15 , “The Lord thy God will raise up unto thee a prophet from the midst of thee, like unto me”. Allusion is made to this prophet in four places in this Gospel, the present verse and Joh 1:25 of this chapter; also in Joh 6:14 and Joh 7:40 . That the Jews did not see in this prophet the Messiah would appear from the present verse, and also from Joh 7:40 : “Some said, Of a truth this is the prophet; others said, This is the Christ”. The Jews looked for “a faithful prophet” ( 1Ma 14:41 ) who was to terminate the prophetic period and usher in the Messianic reign. But after Peter, as recorded in Act 3:22 , applied the prophecy of Deut. to Christ, the Christian Church adopted this interpretation. The use of the prophecy by Christ Himself justified this. But the different interpretations thus introduced gave rise to some confusion, and as Lightfoot points out, none but a Jew contemporary with Christ could so clearly have held the distinction between the two interpretations. (See Deane’s Pseudepig. , p. 121; Wendt’s Teaching of Jesus , E. Tr., i., 67; and on the relation of “the prophet” to Jeremiah, see Weber, p. 339.) To this question also John answered “No”; “quia Prophetis omnibus erat praestantior” (Lampe). This negation is explained by the affirmation of Joh 1:23 . Thus baffled in all their suggestions the deputies ask John to give them some positive account of himself, that they might not go back to those who sent them without having accomplished the object of their mission. To this second ; ; (Joh 1:23 ) he replies in words made familiar by the Synoptists, ; John applies to himself the words of Isa 40:3 , blending the two clauses and into one: . By appropriating this prophetic description John identifies himself as the immediate precursor of the Messiah; and probably also hints that he himself is no personage worthy that inquiry should terminate on him, but only a voice. [Heracleon neatly graduates revelation, saying that the Saviour is , John is , the whole prophetic order , a mere noise; for which he is with some justice rebuked by Origen.] “The desert,” a pathless, fruitless waste fitly symbolises the spiritual condition of the Messiah’s people. For the coming of their King preparation must be made, especially by such repentance as John preached. “If Israel repent but for one day, the Messiah will come.” Cf. Weber, p. 334.

[28]isch. Tischendorf.

[29] Westcott and Hort.

Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson

Joh 1:19 . With this verse begins the Gospel proper or historical narrative of the manifestation of the glory of the Incarnate Logos.

Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson

NASB (UPDATED) TEXT: Joh 1:19-23

19This is the testimony of John, when the Jews sent to him priests and Levites from Jerusalem to ask him, “Who are you?” 20And he confessed and did not deny, but confessed, “I am not the Christ.” 21They asked him, “What then? Are you Elijah?” And he said, “I am not.” “Are you the Prophet?” And he answered, “No.” 22Then they said to him, “Who are you, so that we may give an answer to those who sent us? What do you say about yourself?” 23He said, “I am a voice of one crying in the wilderness, ‘make straight the way of the Lord,’ as Isaiah the prophet said.”

Joh 1:19 “the Jews” In John this refers to (1) the people of Judea who were hostile to Jesus or (2) the Jewish religious leaders only (cf. Joh 2:18; Joh 5:10; Joh 7:13; Joh 9:22; Joh 12:42; Joh 18:12; Joh 19:38; Joh 20:19). Some scholars have asserted that a Jew would not refer to other Jews in this derogatory way. However, Jewish opposition to Christianity intensified after the Council of Jamnia in A.D. 90.

The word “Jew” basically comes from someone from the tribe of Judah. After the twelve tribes split in 922 B.C., Judah became the name for the southern three tribes. Both Jewish kingdoms, Israel and Judah, were taken into exile, but only a few, mostly from Judah, returned under Cyrus’ edict of 538 B.C. The term then became a title for the descendants of Jacob who lived in Palestine and were scattered throughout the Mediterranean world.

In John the term is mostly negative, but its general use can be seen in Joh 2:6; Joh 4:22.

“priests and Levites” Apparently John the Baptist was also of priestly descent (cf. Luk 1:5 ff). This is the only occurrence of the term “Levites” in the Gospel of John. They possibly were the Temple police. This was an official group of “fact finders” sent from the religious authorities in Jerusalem (cf. Joh 1:24). The priests and Levites were usually Sadducees, while the scribes were usually Pharisees (cf. Joh 1:24). Both of these groups were involved in questioning John the Baptist. The political and religious antagonists joined forces to oppose Jesus and His followers.

“Who are you” This same question is asked of Jesus in Joh 8:25. John and Jesus taught and acted in ways which made the official leaders uncomfortable, because they recognized in both men certain OT eschatological themes and terms. This question, then, relates to the Jewish expectation of end-time, New Age personages.

Joh 1:20 “And he confessed, and did not deny, but confessed” This statement is a strong, threefold denial that he was the expected, promised Messiah (Christ). For “confess” see Special Topic at Joh 9:22-23.

“the Christ” “Christ” is the Greek translation of the Hebrew term “mah,” which meant “an anointed one.” In the OT the concept of anointing was a way of emphasizing God’s special calling and equipping for a specific task. Kings, priests, and prophets were anointed. It came to be identified with that special One who was to implement the new age of righteousness. Many thought John the Baptist was this promised Messiah (cf. Luk 3:15) because he was the first inspired spokesman for YHWH since the OT writers some four hundred years earlier.

At this point I would like to include my comments from Dan 9:26 on “Messiah.”

Dan 9:26

NASB”the Messiah”

NKJV”Messiah”

NRSV”an anointed one”

TEV”God’s chosen leader”

NJB”An Anointed One”

The difficulty in interpreting this verse is because of the possible meanings associated with the term Messiah or anointed one (BDB 603):

1. used of Jewish kings (e.g. 1Sa 2:10; 1Sa 12:3)

2. used of Jewish priests (e.g. Lev 4:3; Lev 4:5)

3. used of Cyrus (cf. Isa 45:1)

4. #1 and #2 are combined in Psalms 110 and Zechariah 4

5. used of God’s special coming Davidic King to bring in the new age of righteousness

a. line of Judah (cf. Gen 49:10)

b. house of Jesse (cf. 2 Samuel 7)

c. universal reign (cf. Psalms 2; Isa 9:6; Isa 11:1-5; Mic 5:1-4 ff)

I personally am attracted to the identification of “an anointed one” with Jesus of Nazareth because of:

1. the introduction of an eternal Kingdom in Daniel 2 during the fourth empire

2. the introduction of “a son of man” in Dan 7:13 being given an eternal kingdom

3. the redemptive clauses of Dan 9:24 which point toward a culmination of fallen world history

4. Jesus’ use of the book of Daniel in the NT (cf. Mat 24:15; Mar 13:14)

Joh 1:21 “‘What then? Are you Elijah'” Because Elijah did not die but rather was taken up in a whirlwind to heaven (cf. 2Ki 2:1), he was expected to come before the Messiah (cf. Mal 3:1; Mal 4:5). John the Baptist looked and acted much like Elijah (cf. Zec 13:4).

“‘I am not'” John the Baptist did not see himself in the eschatological role of Elijah, but Jesus did see him functioning as a fulfillment of Malachi’s prophecy (cf. Mat 11:14; Mat 17:12).

“‘Are you the Prophet'” Moses predicted that one like himself (whom he called “The Prophet”) would come after him (cf. Deu 18:15; Deu 18:18; Joh 1:25; Joh 6:14; Joh 7:40; Act 3:22-23; Act 7:37). There are two distinct ways this term was used in the NT: (1) as an eschatological figure distinct from the Messiah (cf. Joh 7:40-41) or (2) as a figure identified with the Messiah (cf. Act 3:22).

Joh 1:23 “‘I am a voice of one crying in the wilderness'” This is a quote from the Septuagint translation of Isa 40:3 with an allusion to the parallel in Mal 3:1.

“‘Make straight the way of the Lord'” This is a quote from (Isa 40:3) the literary unit of Isaiah (chapters 40-54) in which the Servant Songs occur (cf. Isa 42:1-9; Isa 49:1-7; Isa 50:4-11; Isa 52:13 to Isa 53:12). They initially referred to Israel, but in Isa 52:13 to Isa 53:12, the phrase has been individualized. The concept of straightening the road was used for preparation of a royal visit. The term “straight” is related to the etymology of the term “righteousness.” See Special Topic at 1Jn 2:29.

This whole paragraph may have served John the Apostle’s theological purpose of depreciating John the Baptist because of the development of several heretical groups in the first century that took John the Baptist as their spiritual leader.

Fuente: You Can Understand the Bible: Study Guide Commentary Series by Bob Utley

record witness. Greek. marturia. See note on Joh 1:7,

the Jews. A characteristic expression of this Gospel see note on p. 1511), pointing to the consequences of their rejection of Messiah, when they would be Lo Ammi (= not My People): no longer regarded as “Israel”, but as “Jews”, the name given them by Gentiles.

sent = deputed. App-174.

from = out of. Greek. ek. App-104.

ask. Greek. erotao. App-134.

Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics

19-28.] The first witness borne by John to Jesus: before the deputation from the Sanhedrim.

Fuente: The Greek Testament

Joh 1:19-28. And this in the record of John, when the Jews sent priests and Levites from Jerusalem to ask him, Who art thou? And he confessed and denied not; but confessed, I am not the Christ. And they asked him, What then? Art thou Elias? And he saith, I am not. Art thou that prophet? And he answered, No. Then said they unto Him, Who art thou? that we may give an answer to them that sent us. What sayest thou of thyself? He said, I am the voice of one crying in the wilderness, Make straight the way of the Lord, as said the Esaias. And they which were sent were of the Pharisees. And they asked him, and said unto him, Why baptizest thou then, if thou be not that Christ, nor Elias, neither that prophet? John answered them, saying, I baptize with water: but there standeth one among you, whom ye know not: He it is, who coming after me is preferred before me, whose shoes latchet, I am not worthy to unloose. These things were done in Bethabara beyond Jordan, where John was baptizing.

Was that the place where the Israelites caressed the Jordan? It is said to have been so; and truly this is the place where we cross the Jordan too come out of old Judaism into the true faith of the revealed Christ.

Joh 1:29. The next day John seeth Jesus coming unto him, and saith, Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world.

I think I hear the Elijah-like tones of that son of the desert, Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world.

Joh 1:30. This is he of whom I said, After me cometh a man which is preferred before me: for he was before me.

Ah! how infinitely before John; how before him? Having no beginning of days, before him in his exalted nature, before him in his superior rank and office!

Joh 1:31. And I knew him not: but that he should be made manifest to Israel, therefore am I come baptizing with water.

It was by baptism that the Christ was to be known. John knew more of Jesus Christ than anybody else, yet he did not know him to be the Lamb of God until he had baptized him.

Joh 1:32-33. And John bare record, saying, I saw the Spirit descending from heaven like a dove and it abode upon him. And I knew him not: but he that sent me to baptize with water, the same said unto me. Upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending, and remaining on him, the same is he which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost.

I doubt not that John had assuredly guessed that Jesus was the person; but he had nothing to do with guesses: he was a witness for God, and he could only speak as God revealed things to him.

This exposition consisted of readings from Joh 1:19-33; Joh 19:1-16.

Fuente: Spurgeon’s Verse Expositions of the Bible

Joh 1:19. , the Jews) Matthew, Mark, and Luke rarely employ the appellation Jews; John most frequently: no doubt the cause is, they supposed, as their first readers, Jews: John, believers of the Gentiles.- , from Jerusalem) that seat of religion.- , priests and Levites) With the testimony of John to the people is interwoven his testimony to the rulers. This embassy, sent forty days at least after the baptism of Jesus [to allow for the forty days temptation subsequent to the baptism], indicates, that the preaching of John began not at a long interval before the baptism of Jesus. Otherwise the embassy would have been sent earlier.-, that they should ask) in the public name, ch. Joh 5:33 [Ye sent unto John, and he bare witness unto the truth].- ; who art thou?) with that baptism of thine, Joh 1:25. [Why baptizeth thou then?]

Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament

Joh 1:19

Joh 1:19

And this is the witness of John, when the Jews sent unto him from Jerusalem priests and Levites-The Jews in Jerusalem were the most zealous of the law. Jerusalem was the center of Judaism. John in the wilderness attracted the masses by his preaching.

to ask him, Who art thou?-The Jews at Jerusalem sent the priests and Levites to hear him, see what he claimed for himself as a religious teacher, and demand of him who he was.

Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary

And this is the record of John, when the Jews sent priests and Levites from Jerusalem to ask him, Who art thou? And he confessed, and denied not; but confessed, I am not the Christ. And they asked him, What then? Art thou Elias? And he saith, I am not. Art thou that prophet? And he answered, No. Then said they unto him, Who art thou? that we may give an answer to them that sent us. What sayest thou of thyself? He said, I am the voice of one crying in the wilderness, make straight the way of the Lord, as said the prophet Esaias. And they which were sent were of the Pharisees. And they asked him, and said unto him, Why baptizest thou then, if thou be not that Christ, nor Elias, neither that prophet? John answered them, saying, I baptize with water: but there standeth one among you, whom ye know not; he it is, who coming after me is preferred before me, whose shoes latchet I am not worthy to unloose. These things were done in Bethabara beyond Jordan, where John was baptizing. The next day John seeth Jesus coming unto him, and saith, Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world. This is he of whom I said, After me cometh a man which is preferred before me: for he was before me. And I knew him not: but that he should be made manifest to Israel, therefore am I come baptizing with water. And John bare record, saying, I saw the Spirit descending from heaven like a dove, and it abode upon him. And I knew him not: but he that sent me to baptize with water, the same said unto me, Upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending, and remaining on him, the same is he which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost. And I saw, and bare record that this is the Son of God.

In the last two messages we have been dealing with the testimony of John the Baptist. I fear that many Christians fail to realize how much God, by the Holy Spirit, committed to His servant John. Many of us think of him as one who had very little gospel light or understanding of the person of our Lord Jesus Christ. But we have already seen that he recognized in the Lord Jesus the preexistent One. He says in verse 15, He was before me, and those words are repeated in verse 30. So John recognized in our Lord Jesus One who did not begin to live when He was born here on earth, but One who had life with the Father before He deigned in grace to come down to this world and link His Deity with our humanity, apart from its sin, and be born as Marys Child.

If we are to take verses 16-18 as uttered by John, we would have a wonderful unfolding of truth indeed. But it seems much more likely that these words are the Spirits commentary through the apostle. They form a parenthesis, and then the record of John begins again in verse 19, When the Jews sent priests and Levites from Jerusalem to ask him, Who art thou?

Let us consider more fully the parenthetical portion. Out of the fullness of grace manifested in Jesus, we who believe have received abundant supply for every need-even grace for grace, or, as we might read, grace upon grace. It is just one evidence after another of Gods rich grace, as we go on to know and enjoy communion with our blessed Lord, whose ministry was so different from that of Moses, the mediator and messenger of the old covenant. Through him the law was given, and that law was the revelation of the mind of God, according to which men (in Israel) were responsible to walk, until Jesus came. The law, says Paul, was our [child trainer up] to Christ (Gal 3:24). Now grace and truth have been told out in Jesus, so we are no longer under [the child trainer] (v. 25)- We see in Christ the full revelation of the Father: grace and truth manifested in a Man here on earth, and that Man the delight of the Fathers heart. The law, as we have pointed out, was truth, but it was truth without grace. God is light and God is love, so both the holiness, which is according to truth, and the grace, which covers every sin and meets every need, are seen in Jesus. He, the only-begotten Son, ever dwelling in the bosom of the Father, has told out God in all His essential glory. People speak of Jesus leaving the bosom of the Father. But that is not the language of Scripture. The bosom is the place of affection. He never left that. He subsists in the Fathers bosom. When here on earth He was as truly the Object of the Fathers love as when He was in the glory from which He came to redeem us by His atoning death.

If John the Baptist saw all this and spoke these words, then his was a knowledge of Christ far beyond that with which he is generally credited. But if, as seems evident, we have here the Holy Spirits later comment, we would not forget that all was true of Jesus even in Johns day.

Let us now follow the Baptists further testimony.

He had aroused wonderful interest by his preaching and baptizing. Over all the land of Palestine people were speaking of this strange new prophet who had appeared in the wilderness and was drawing great throngs after him. He sternly rebuked sin and iniquity, called men to a baptism of repentance, and proclaimed the near coming of the kingdom of God on earth. Many believed his message and manifested their faith by taking their place in baptism as those who deserved to die. Everywhere the people were stirred.

The Jews sent some of their important leaders down to Jerusalem to ask him, Who art thou? And he confessed and denied not; but confessed, I am not the Christ (vv. 19-20). He knew that many were thinking that probably he was the long-promised Messiah who was to bring in the era of peace. But he said, I am not the Messiah. I am not the Promised One. They said, Who are you then? Are you Elias? Elias, you know, is just the Greek form for the Hebrew word, Elijah. Why did they put that question to him? One who prophesied four hundred years before John came into the world, uttered this prediction, Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet He shall turn the hearts of the fathers to the children (Mai. 4:5-6). And so they said to him, Are you Elijah? Are you he who was to bring the solemn message warning of judgment? John says, No, I am not. And yet you remember that the Lord Jesus Christ Himself, when the disciples put the question to Him as to whether Elijah must not first come, answered and said, Elias is indeed come, and they have done unto him whatsoever they [would] (Mar 9:13). And they understood He spoke of John. He came in the power and spirit of Elijah.

But John denied that he was personally Elijah. He would not direct attention to himself. He had come to occupy people with Another. Then they asked him, Art thou that prophet? (v. 21). What did they mean? To whom were they referring? In the book of Deuteronomy it is written that Moses said, The LORD thy God will raise up unto thee a Prophet like unto me (Deu 18:15). God had said, I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him. And it shall come to pass, that whosoever will not hearken unto my words which he shall speak in my name, [shall be destroyed] (vv. 18-19). These words refer to Christ, not to John. So again he disavowed any such claim.

They asked, Who art thou? What sayest thou of thyself? (v. 22). He had not been talking about himself at all. We like to talk about ourselves, but John was not as we. He was not talking about himself. He was not trying to draw peoples attention to himself. He came to occupy them with the coming One. So when they asked, What sayest thou of thyself? He replied, I am the voice of one crying in the wilderness, Make straight the way of the Lord (v. 23). You cannot see a voice. You can hear it, but you cannot see it. I am just here as a voice crying in the wilderness, Make straight the way of the Lord, as said the prophet Esaias.

The fortieth chapter of Isaiah begins with these words, Comfort ye, comfort ye my people, saith your God. Speak ye comfortably to Jerusalem, and cry unto her that her warfare is accomplished, that her iniquity is pardoned: for she hath received of the Lords hand double for all her sins (vv. 1-2). That is, her sins are paid for, referring to the atoning work of our Lord Jesus Christ. And so the prophet then proclaims the gospel to comfort the people of God. In verse 3 we read, The voice of him that crieth in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the LORD, make straight in the desert a highway for our God. Whose way was to be prepared? The way of the Lord. Who was the Lord? A highway for our God.

So John spoke in the full recognition of the fact that the One who was coming was God, manifest in the flesh. For when he said, I am the voice of one crying in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make straight in the desert a highway for our God, he used the word that means Jehovah. This lowly Man, Jesus of Nazareth who appeared among the people, was none other than Jehovah Himself who came to redeem poor sinners. But let us follow the declaration of Isaiah. The voice said, Cry. He asked, What shall I cry? and the Lord replied, All flesh is grass, and all the goodliness thereof is as the flower of the field: the grass withereth, the flower fadeth: because the spirit of the LORD bloweth upon it: surely the people is grass. The grass withereth, the flower fadeth: but the word of our God shall stand for ever (Isa 40:6-8).

Why, you say, there isnt very much comfort in that. No, apparently not. But that is always the way God begins to comfort people. Men are so proud and so forgetful of their own sinfulness. Their consciences are so inactive that if God is going to do something for men, He must make them realize their own littleness and their own sinfulness. That is why the apostle Peter linked this passage with the gospel and the new birth. For all flesh is as grass, and all the glory of man as the flower of grass. The grass withereth, and the flower thereof falleth away: but the word of the Lord endureth for ever. And this is the word which by the gospel is preached unto you (1Pe 1:24-25). Why do we need to be born again? Because that which is born of the flesh is flesh (Joh 3:6), and all flesh is as grass. Why do we need a new life? Because we are under judgment and this life is soon going to pass away and we must meet God. It is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment (Heb 9:27). Let this word sink into the depths of our souls. Let it rebuke our pride and self-sufficiency. All the glory of man-the things that men are most delighted with-is just like the flower that is soon gone. How we need life from God! He that hath the Son hath life (1Jn 5:12).

And so, John sees in this fortieth chapter of Isaiah a prophecy referring to himself. He says, This is who I am. Simply a voice crying in the wilderness. They which were sent were of the Pharisees, and they continued questioning. They were not satisfied. They just went on from one question to the other and did not stop to consider the answers. They were not interested in learning the truth of God. They started questioning him along another line. Why baptizest thou then, if thou be not that Christ, nor Elias, neither that prophet? (v. 25). John did not attempt to defend himself or explain to them, for he knew their unbelieving attitude. He simply said, I baptize with water: but there standeth one among you, whom ye know not; he it is, who coming after me is preferred before me, whose shoes latchet I am not worthy to unloose (vv. 26-27). Apparently with that, these Pharisees went their way. They had no real interest in this matter that was exercising the minds and consciences of others.

But now in the next statement of the passage we find John giving utterance to one of the greatest truths of the gospel. The next day John seeth Jesus coming unto him (v. 29a). No doubt he had often looked out over that great throng and mused, I wonder if He is here yet. I wonder if the time for Him to be manifested has come. But day after day there was no answering voice to his hearts question. But now he sees Jesus coming toward him and the Spirit of God says, There He is, John, and John immediately exclaims, Behold the Lamb of God, which [beareth] away the sin of the world (v. 29b).

Have you ever thought what must have been involved in that? All down through the centuries Israel had known of the sacrificed lamb. They knew that long years ago when Abraham and Isaac were going up the mountain, Isaac turned to his father and said, Father, here is the fire and the wood, but where is the lamb? And Abraham said, My son, God will provide Himself a lamb for a burnt offering. And then they knew that when Israel was about to come out of Egypt God said, You are to take a lamb and kill it and sprinkle the blood. The death angel is going through Egypt at midnight, but when he sees the blood he will pass over you. And they knew that in the temple service, every morning and every evening a lamb was placed upon the altar for a burnt offering. Isaiah had prophesied of the One who would be led as a lamb to the slaughter, in order to become the sacrifice for sins. At last He had come of whom the prophets had spoken, and John exclaimed, Behold the Lamb of God, which [beareth] away the sin of the world! He recognized in Jesus the object of all prophetic testimony and the fulfillment of all the types of the law. Notice how he dwells on the vicarious atonement: Behold the Lamb of God, which [beareth] away the sin of the world. He knew that in Isaiah 53 it was written of the Lamb of God, He was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed (v. 5). At last He had come in accordance with the Word of God!

And you will notice this. He does not say merely sins. It is sin, in the singular. I think that you will find that when people attempt to quote this verse they generally say sins. Sins are only the effect of a cause, and the Lamb of God came, not only to take away the individuals sins, but to take away or deal with the sin question as a whole. The apostle Paul said, [God] hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin (2Co 5:21). He is not only the bearer of our transgressions, He not only atoned for all our acts of sin, but He died for what we are as sinners by nature. And let me say something to you that may make you think you can never trust me again: I have been guilty of many sins that I have had to go to God and confess, and I know those sins have all been forgiven. But I am a worse man than anything I have ever done! Would you like to trust me now? I mean this. Within this heart of mine there are tendencies to sin that are worse than any act of sin I have ever committed. This is true of us all. We are sinners by nature. Sin dwells in us. Christ died to put away sin, not merely sins, by the sacrifice of Himself. We have in us that thing which God calls sin in the flesh. God took all that into account when Christ hung on the cross. He died because of what we were. He took our place. He was made sin for us, and sin, as a barrier, was taken away. Now the vilest sinner can come into the presence of God and find forgiveness. Do you know this Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world?

Then John says, This is he of whom I said, After me cometh a man which is preferred before me: for he was before me. And I knew him not (vv. 30-31a). Evidently he had been out in company where Jesus was, but he did not understand that this was the Messiah until now. He knew him not: but that he should be made manifest to Israel, therefore am I come baptizing with water. And John bare record, saying, I saw the Spirit descending from heaven like a dove-you see this event takes place after the baptism, which is not referred to here, but is mentioned in other Gospels-I saw the Spirit descending from heaven like a dove, and it abode upon him. And I knew him not: but he that sent me to baptize with water, the same said unto me, Upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending, and remaining upon him, the same is he which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost (vv. 31-33). The great work that John was sent to do was nearing an end. Now here is the climax: I saw and bare record that this is the Son of God. Did John really know that? Yes, he did-I saw, and bare record that this is the Son of God (v. 34). Do you know that, dear friend? Have you trusted Him for yourself? Oh, if you have never trusted Him before, wont you come to God, owning your sin? Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world.

Fuente: Commentaries on the New Testament and Prophets

when: Joh 5:33-36, Deu 17:9-11, Deu 24:8, Mat 21:23-32, Luk 3:15-18

Who: Joh 10:24, Act 13:25, Act 19:4

Reciprocal: Mar 1:3 – General Luk 20:4 – baptism Joh 1:7 – a witness Joh 8:25 – Who Joh 12:17 – bare Act 18:25 – knowing 1Jo 5:11 – this

Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge

9

For comments on priests and Levites, see at Luke 10:31. 32.

Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary

THE verses we have now read begin the properly historical part of John’s Gospel. Hitherto we have been reading deep and weighty statements about Christ’s divine nature, incarnation, and dignity. Now we come to the plain narrative of the days of Christ’s earthly ministry, and the plain story of Christ’s doings and sayings among men. And here, like the other Gospel-writers, John begins at once with “the record” or testimony of John the Baptist. (Mat 3:1; Mar 1:2; Luk 3:2.)

We have, for one thing, in these verses, an instructive example of true humility. That example is supplied by John the Baptist himself.

John the Baptist was an eminent saint of God. There are few names which stand higher than his in the Bible calendar of great and good men. The Lord Jesus Himself declared that “Among them that are born of woman there hath not risen a greater than John the Baptist.” (Mat 11:11.) The Lord Jesus Himself declared that he was “a burning and a shining light.” (Joh 5:35.) Yet here in this passage we see this eminent saint lowly, self-abased, and full of humility. He puts away from himself the honor which the Jews from Jerusalem were ready to pay him. He declines all flattering titles. He speaks of himself as nothing more than the “voice of one crying in the wilderness,” and as one who “baptized with water.” He proclaims loudly that there is One standing among the Jews far greater than himself, One whose shoe-latchet he is not worthy to unloose. He claims honor not for himself but for Christ. To exalt Christ was his mission, and to that mission he steadfastly adheres.

The greatest saints of God in every age of the Church have always been men of John the Baptist’s spirit. In gifts, and knowledge, and general character they have often differed widely. But in one respect they have always been alike;-they have been “clothed with humility.” (1Pe 5:5.) They have not sought their own honor. They have thought little of themselves. They have been ever willing to decrease if Christ might only increase, to be nothing if Christ might be all. And here has been the secret of the honor God has put upon them. “He that humbleth himself shall be exalted.” (Luk 14:11.)

If we profess to have any real Christianity, let us strive to be of John the Baptist’s spirit. Let us study humility. This is the grace with which all must begin, who would be saved. We have no true religion about us, until we cast away our high thoughts, and feel ourselves sinners.-This is the grace which all saints may follow after, and which none have any excuse for neglecting. All God’s children have not gifts, or money, or time to work, or a wide sphere of usefulness; but all may be humble.-This is the grace, above all, which will appear most beautiful in our latter end. Never shall we feel the need of humility so deeply, as when we lie on our deathbeds, and stand before the judgment-seat of Christ. Our whole lives will then appear a long catalogue of imperfections, ourselves nothing, and Christ all.

We have, for another thing, in these verses, a mournful example of the blindness of unconverted men. That example is supplied by the state of the Jews who came to question John the Baptist.

These Jews professed to be waiting for the appearance of Messiah. Like all the Pharisees they prided themselves on being children of Abraham, and possessors of the covenants. They rested in the law, and made their boast of God. They professed to know God’s will, and to believe God’s promises. They were confident that they themselves were guides of the blind, and lights of them that sat in darkness. (Rom 2:17-19.) And yet at this very moment their souls were utterly in the dark. “There was standing among them,” as John the Baptist told them, “One whom they knew not.” Christ Himself, the promised Messiah, was in the midst of them, and yet they neither knew Him, nor saw Him, nor received Him, nor acknowledged Him, nor believed Him. And worse than this, the vast majority of them never would know Him! The words of John the Baptist are a prophetic description of a state of things which lasted during the whole of our Lord’s earthly ministry. Christ “stood among the Jews,” and yet the Jews knew Him not, and the greater part of them died in their sins.

It is a solemn thought that John the Baptist’s words in this place apply strictly to thousands in the present day. Christ is still standing among many who neither see, nor know, nor believe. Christ is passing by in many a parish and many a congregation, and the vast majority have neither an eye to see Him, nor an ear to hear Him. The spirit of slumber seems poured out upon them. Money, and pleasure, and the world they know; but they know not Christ. The kingdom of God is close to them; but they sleep. Salvation is within their reach; but they sleep. Mercy, grace, peace, heaven, eternal life, are so nigh that they might touch them; and yet they sleep. “Christ standeth among them and they know him not.” These are sorrowful things to write down. But every faithful minister of Christ can testify, like John the Baptist, that they are true.

What are we doing ourselves? This, after all, is the great question that concerns us. Do we know the extent of our religious privileges in this country, and in these times? Are we aware that Christ is going to and fro in our land, inviting souls to join Him and to be His disciples? Do we know that the time is short and that the door of mercy will soon be closed for evermore? Do we know that Christ rejected will soon be Christ withdrawn?-Happy are they who can give a good account of these inquiries and who “know the day of their visitation”! (Luk 19:44.) It will be better at the last day never to have been born, than to have had Christ “standing among us” and not to have known Him.

==================

Notes-

v19.-[This is the record.] The Greek word translated “record,” is the same that is rendered “witness” in Joh 1:7. The sentence means, “this is the testimony that John bore.”

[When.] This word raises the question, “At what time was this testimony of John borne?” It appears to have been after our Lord Jesus Christ’s baptism, and at the end of His forty days’ temptation in the wilderness. Joh 1:29 tells us, that “the next day John seeth Jesus coming to him.” It is worthy of notice that nowhere in the Gospels do we find “days” so carefully marked, as in that portion of the first chapter of John, which we have now begun.

[The Jews.] This expression is remarkable, as peculiar to John’s Gospel. He generally speaks of our Lord’s enemies and questioners, as “the Jews.” It seems to indicate that John did not write his Gospel in Palestine or at Jerusalem, and that it was written especially for the Gentile Christians scattered over the world, and much later than the other three Gospels.

[Sent Priests and Levites….Jerusalem.] These words show that those who questioned John the Baptist on this occasion, were a formal deputation, sent with authority from the Sanhedrim, or ecclesiastical council of the Jews, to inquire about John’s proceedings, and to report what he taught, and whom he gave himself out to be.

Wordsworth remarks, that “More honour was paid by the Jews to John than to Christ, both in the persons sent, and in the place from which they were sent. They esteemed John for his sacredotal lineage.” When Christ appeared, they called Him the Carpenter’s Son. Our Lord refers to this great respect at first shown to John, when He says, “ye were willing for a season to rejoice in his light.” (Joh 5:35.)

[To ask him, Who art thou?] We can hardly suppose that these Priests and Levites were ignorant that John was the son of a priest, Zacharias, and therefore a Levite himself. Their inquiry seems to refer to John’s office. “What did he profess to be? Did he assume to be the Messiah? Did he claim to be a prophet? What reason could he assign for his having taken up his remarkable position as a preacher and a baptizer at a distance from Jerusalem? What account could he give of himself and his ministry?”

Two things are plainly taught in this verse. One is, the great sensation which John the Baptist’s ministry caused throughout Palestine. He attracted so much notice, and such crowds followed him, that the Sanhedrim felt it necessary to inquire about him.-The other is, the state of expectation in which the minds of the Jews were at this particular season. Partly from the seventy weeks of Daniel having expired, partly from the sceptre having practically departed from Judah, there was evidently an expectation that some remarkable person was about to appear.-As to the sort of person the Jews expected, it is plain that they only looked for a temporal King, who would make them once more an independent nation. They had no idea of a spiritual Saviour from sin. But as to the fact that this vague expectation existed throughout the East at this particular time, we have the direct testimony of Latin historians. The extraordinary ministry of John the Baptist, at once suggested the idea to the Jews at Jerusalem, that he might possibly be the expected Redeemer. Therefore they sent to ask, “Who art thou? Art thou the long expected King?”

v20.-[He confessed….denied not….confessed, &c.] This is a peculiar form of speech, implying a very positive, unmistakable, emphatic asseveration. It gives the idea of a man shrinking with holy indignation from the very thought of being regarded as the Christ;-“Pain me not by suggesting that such an one as I can be the Christ of God. I am one far inferior to Him.”

Bengel says on this verse, “Whilst John denied himself, he did not deny Christ.”-Luther makes some excellent remarks on the strong temptation which was here put in John’s way, to take honour to himself, and the humility and faith which he showed in overcoming it.

v21.-[Art thou Elias?] This question was not an absurd and unnatural one, as some commentators have thought fit to say. It was based upon that prophecy of Malachi, which speaks of God “sending Elijah the prophet before the great and terrible day of the LORD.” (Mal 4:5.) The manner, dress, and ministry of John the Baptist, as well as his appearing in the wilderness, constituted a great similarity between him and Elijah, and suggested the idea that John might possibly be Elijah. “If this man,” thought the Priests and Levites, “is not the Christ, perhaps he is his forerunner, the prophet Elijah.”

[And he saith, I am not.] This answer of John’s deserves particular notice, and involves a grave difficulty. How could John say, “I am not Elias,” when Christ says distinctly in another place, “This is Elias.” How shall we reconcile these two statements?-To me it seems impossible to explain John’s words, except on the simple theory, that there are two comings of Elijah the prophet. The first was only a coming in spirit and in power, but not a literal coming. The second will be a literal and real appearance on earth of him whom Elisha saw taken up into heaven. The first coming took place at Christ’s first advent, and was fulfilled by John the Baptist going before Messiah’s face in the spirit and power of Elijah. The second coming of Elijah will take place at the second advent of Jesus Christ, and will he fulfilled by Elijah himself once more coming as a prophet to the tribes of Israel.

It is of this second, future, literal coming of Elias that John speaks in this place. When he says, “I am not Elias,” he means, “I am not that Elijah you mean, who was taken up to heaven 900 years ago. The coming of that Elijah is yet a future thing. I am the forerunner of the first advent in humiliation, not of the second advent in glory. I am not the herald of Christ coming to reign, as Elijah will be one day, but the herald of Christ coming to suffer on the cross. I am not come to prepare the way for a conquering King, such as you fondly expect, but for a meek and lowly Saviour, whose great work is to bear our sins and to die. I am not the Elias you expect.”

In confirmation of this view, our Lord’s remarkable words in another Gospel, ought to be carefully studied. He says distinctly “Elias truly shall first come, and restore all things,” (Mat 17:11.) And yet He adds in the same breath, “I say unto you that Elias is come already,” that is, “He is come, in a certain sense, by John the Baptist going before my face in the spirit and power of Elias.” In short, our Lord says at the same time, “Elias shall come,” and “Elias is come”!-To me His words seem a plain proof of the theory I am here maintaining, that there are two comings of Elias. In spirit Elias came, when John the Baptist came, a man like to Elias in mind and habits. But in the flesh Elias has not yet come, and is yet to appear. And it was in the view of this future, literal coming, that John the Baptist said, “I am not Elias.”-He knew that the Jews were thinking of the times of Messiah’s glory, and of the literal coming of Elijah, which would usher in those times. Therefore he says, “I am not the Elias you mean. I belong to a different dispensation.”

The other view, which is undoubtedly maintained by the vast majority of commentators, appears to me surrounded with insuperable difficulties. According to them, there never was to be more than one fulfilment of Malachi’s prophecy about Elias. It was to be fulfilled by John the Baptist; and when he appeared, it had received its full accomplishment. How John the Baptist’s answer in this place can be satisfactorily explained, according to this theory, I am quite unable to see. The Jews ask him plainly, whether he is Elias, that is, whether he is the person who is to fulfil Malachi’s prophecy. This, at any rate, was evidently the idea in their minds. He answers distinctly that he is not. And yet according to the theory against which I contend, he was Elias, and he ought to have replied, “I am.” In short, he appears to say that which is not true!-There never was to be any one after him, who was to fulfil Malachi’s prophecy, and yet he declares in effect that he does not fulfil it, by saying that he is not Elias!

About the future literal coming of Elijah the prophet, when the Jews will at last see a living person, who will say, “I am Elias,” this is not the place to speak. Whether or not he will minister to any but the Jews,-whether or not he will prove one of the two witnesses spoken of in Revelation, (Rev 11:3,) are interesting and disputed questions. I will only remark, that the subject deserves far more attention than it ordinarily receives.

The following quotations from the Fathers will show that the opinion I have expressed is not a modern one:

Chrysostom, on Mat 17:10, says, “As there are two comings of Christ,-first, to suffer,-secondly, to judge, so there are two comings of Elias; first of John before Christ’s first coming, who is called Elias, because he came in the manner and spirit of Elias; secondly, of the person of Elijah, the Tishbite, before Christ’s second coming.”-Jerome and Theophylact say just the same.

Gregory, quoted by Mayer, says, “Whereas John denieth himself to be Elias, and Christ after affirmeth it, there is no contradiction. There is a double coming of Elias. The one is in spirit, before Christ’s coming to redeem; the other in person, before Christ’s coming to judgment. According to the first, Christ’s saying is true, ‘This is Elias.’ According to the second, John’s speech is true, ‘I am not.’ This was the fittest answer to men asking in a carnal sense.”

Augustine says, “What John was to the first advent, Elias will be to the second advent. As there are two advents, so there are two heralds.”

[Art thou that prophet?] There are two views of this question. Some think, as Augustine and Gregory, that the words should be as our marginal reading has them, “Art thou a prophet?” Others think, as Cyril and Chrysostom, that the question referred to “the prophet,” of whom Moses foretold that he would come. (Deu 18:15.) I decidedly prefer the latter view. It seems very improbable that John the Baptist would entirely deny that he was a prophet.-Besides this, it seems not unreasonable that the Jews would ask whether he was “the great prophet foretold by Moses.” And to this question, John answers most truly, that he was not.-It admits of doubt, whether the Jews who questioned him, clearly saw that the “prophet like unto Moses,” and the “Messiah,” were to be one and the same. It rather looks as if they thought “Christ” and “the prophet” were two different persons.

Lightfoot thinks that the question refers to a common expectation among the Jews, that the prophets were to rise again at the coming of Messiah, and that John’s questioners meant, “Art thou one of the prophets raised from the dead?” This superstitious notion explains the words of the disciples in Luke, “Others say that one of the old prophets is risen again.” (Luk 9:19.) But the Greek article in the words before us, seems to me too strong to be rendered “a prophet.”

v22.-[An answer to them that sent us.] This expression confirms the opinion already given, about the character of those who questioned John. They were not idle inquirers, but a formal deputation sent down from the Sanhedrim at Jerusalem, with a commission to find out who John was, and to make a report of what they discovered.

v23.-[He said, I am the voice, &c.] John the Baptist’s account of himself in this verse, consists of a reference to Scripture. He reminds the Priests and Levites who wanted to know who he was, of Isaiah’s prophecy concerning the times of the Messiah. (Isa 40:3.) They would there find Isaiah saying, with the abruptness of an inspired prophet, and speaking as if he saw what he was describing, “The voice of Him that crieth in the wilderness.” That means, “I hear in spirit, as I look forward to Messiah’s time, a man crying in a wilderness, prepare ye the way of the LORD.”-“That prophecy,” says John the Baptist, “is this day fulfilled in me. I am the person whom Isaiah saw and heard in vision. I am come to prepare the way for Messiah, like a man going before a King in a desert country, to prepare a road for his master. I am come to make ready the barren hearts of the Jewish nation for Christ’s first advent, and the kingdom of God. I am only a voice. I do not come to work miracles. I do not want disciples to follow me, but my master. The object of my mission is to be a herald, a crier, a warning voice to my fellow-countrymen, so that when my master begins His ministry they may not be found unprepared.

[The wilderness.] The common view of this expression is, that it refers to John the Baptist’s ministry having begun in the wilderness of Juda. I rather doubt the correctness of this idea. The whole quotation is undeniably figurative. The prophet compares Messiah’s forerunner to one preparing a road for a King through a desert or uninhabited country. The “way” or road, is unquestionably figurative, and the straightness of the way too. No one supposes that Isaiah meant that John the Baptist was literally to make a road. But if the “way” is figurative, the country through which it is made must surely be figurative too. I therefore think that the wilderness is a prophetical and figurative description of the spiritual barrenness of Israel, when the Messiah’s forerunner began his ministry. At the same time, I fully admit that John’s retired and ascetic habits and his residence in the wilderness, form a remarkable coincidence with the text.

The expression “voice,” has often been remarked as a beautiful illustration of the general character of John’s ministry. He was eminently a humble man. He was one who desired to be heard, and to awaken attention by the sound of his testimony, but not to be seen or visibly honoured.

v24.-[And they….sent….Pharisees.] The object of this verse is somewhat doubtful. Some think that it refers to the verse preceding, which contains a quotation from Isaiah. They which were sent, being Pharisees, and not Sadducees or Herodians, should have seen and admitted the Scriptural character of John’s mission.-Some think, as Bengel, that it refers to the following verse, in which a question was raised about baptism. They which were sent, being Pharisees, were specially strict about ceremonies, ordinances, and forms. Therefore they were not satisfied with a reference to Scripture. They asked John’s authority for baptizing. Some think that it refers generally to the notorious’ enmity and dislike with which the Pharisees regarded John the Baptist all through his ministry. Our Lord says in another place, “They rejected the counsel of God, not being baptized by him.” (Luk 7:30.) The text before us would then mean, that they which asked all these questions, asked them with a thoroughly unfriendly spirit, and with no real desire to learn God’s truth, because they were Pharisees.

v25.-[Why baptizest thou….if thou be not, &c.] This verse evidently implies that John’s questioners expected the Messiah, or his forerunner, to baptize whenever he appeared. It is not unlikely, as Lightfoot says, that the idea arose from the text in Ezekiel, describing Messiah’s time, “Then will I sprinkle clean water upon you, and ye shall be clean,” &c. (Eze 36:25.)

Luther thinks, that this verse shows that the questioners who came to John, now changed their tone. Hitherto they had flattered. Now they began to threaten.

One thing is very clear from this verse. The Jews were not unacquainted with baptism as a religious ordinance. It was one of the ceremonies, according to Lightfoot, by which proselytes were admitted into the Jewish Church. Moreover it is worthy of notice, that when proselytes were so admitted, their children were baptized together with them. It was not therefore the fact of John baptizing, which the Pharisees here called in question, but his authority for administering baptism.

v26.-[I baptize with water; but &c.] The answer of John the Baptist here reported is very elliptical, and the full meaning of what he said must be supplied from other places. He seems to say, “I do not baptize by my own authority, but by a commission from One far higher than either you or I. I only baptize with water; and I do not do it to make disciples for myself, but for my master. I form no party. I ask no man to follow me. I tell all whom I baptize to believe on that Mighty One who is coming after me. I am only the servant of One far greater than myself, who is even now standing among you, if you had eyes to see him. He is one so much above me in nature and dignity, that I am not worthy to be his humblest servant. He can baptize hearts, and will fulfil the promises about Messiah, to which you are vaguely referring. In the mean time I only baptize with water all those who profess repentance and willingness to receive my master.-I baptize for another and not for myself.”

[There standeth one among you.] I doubt whether these words literally mean, “There is standing in the crowd of you my hearers.” I prefer the sense, “there is already living and abiding among you in this land of Juda one greater than I.” I think this the sense because of the words in the 29th verse, “John seeth Jesus coming to him,” which seem to imply that he was not with him the previous day.-The thought seems parallel to that contained in the words, “The kingdom of God cometh not with observation.”-“The messenger of God cometh suddenly to his temple.” (Mal 3:1; Luk 17:20.) All serve to point to the same truth, viz.-that when Messiah came the first time, He came quietly, without noise, without display, without the nation of the Jews knowing it, so that he “stood among them,” and yet they were not aware of His presence.

The Greek word rendered “standeth,” is in the perfect tense, and would be literally rendered, “there hath stood,” that is, ”hath stood for some little time, and is still standing.” The Messiah has come and is present. Bengel renders it, “hath taken his stand.”

The view I have maintained of the meaning of the word “standeth,” is held by Parkhurst, who defines it as “being or living,” and quotes Joh 6:22, as a parallel instance. Pearce takes the same view, and quotes Act 26:22. Jansenius renders it, “has conversed among you, as when he sat among the doctors” in the temple. Aretius renders it, “He is present in the flesh, and walking in Juda.”

[Ye know not.] This seems to mean, not only that the Jews knew not Jesus the Messiah by sight, but that they had no spiritual knowledge of him, and of the true nature of his office, as the Saviour of sinners.-“Ye look for a conquering, reigning Messiah. Ye know not the suffering Messiah, who came to be cut off, and to be crucified for sinners.”

Bengel remarks, that John is here specially “addressing inhabitants of Jerusalem, who had not been present at the baptism of Jesus. And he whets their desires, that they may be anxious to become acquainted with him.”

v27.-[Coming after….preferred before.] The remarks made on Joh 1:15 apply fully to this expression. John declares, that though his master, in point of time, began his ministry after him, in point of dignity he was far above him. To exalt Christ, and abase himself, seem ideas never long out of John’s mind.

[Shoe’s latchet….worthy to unloose.] This is evidently a proverbial expression. “I am so inferior to Him that came after me, that in comparison with him, I am like the humblest servant compared to his master.” To be not fit to carry a person’s shoes, in our times, is a well-known proverb, describing inferiority.

v28.-[These things….done in Bethabara.] In hot countries like Palestine, it was evidently important for John the Baptist to be near a supply of water, suited to the baptism of the multitudes who came to him. If Beth-barah, spoken of in Gideon’s history is the same place, it is worthy of notice that it is specially mentioned as near “waters.” (Jdg 7:24.)

The name of the place ought always to be dear to the hearts of Christians. It is the place where the first disciples of Jesus were made, and the foundation of the Christian church was laid. It was here, “the next day,” that Jesus was publicly proclaimed as the “Lamb of God.” It was here, “the day after,” that Andrew and another disciple followed Jesus. Here then the Church of Christ, properly so called, began.

In leaving this passage, let us remember that John the Baptist’s ministry left the Jews entirely without excuse, when afterwards they refused to believe on Christ. They could never plead that our Lord’s ministry came on them unawares and took them by surprise. The whole nation dwelling in Palestine, from the great ecclesiastical council down to the humblest classes, were evidently aroused to a state of attention by John’s doings.

Fuente: Ryle’s Expository Thoughts on the Gospels

Joh 1:19. And this is the witness of John, when the Jews sent unto him from Jerusalem priests and Levites to ask him, Who art thou? The preceding verses (Joh 1:1-18) are so strongly marked in character, and so distinctly constitute one coherent whole, that we cannot but place them in a section by themselves. And yet they do not form a distinct preface to the book (such, for example, as we find in Luk 1:1-4), for the first word of the present verse (with which the regular narrative commences) shows that this section must be connected with what goes before. It is possible that this connection is really very close. The words this is the witness of John do not necessarily mean this witness which follows is the witness of John; the Evangelists ordinary usage in similar cases suggests that the sense intended is rather, And of this kindconfirmatory of the preceding statementsis the witness, etc. Such an interpretation best accounts for the use of the present tense, this is (comp. Joh 1:15), standing in striking contrast to the past tenses which immediately follow; it also throws light on the remarkably emphatic words which form the first half of Joh 1:20. Thus viewed, the present section attaches itself to Joh 1:15; what is there given in a general form is now related with greater fulness, in connection with the circumstances of the history. The witness directly intended is that of Joh 1:19-27; but we must also include the very important testimony borne on the following day, especially that of Joh 1:33-34, which presents (in a different form) some of the leading truths of the Prologue.As in the earlier Gospels, the mission of Jesus is introduced by the Baptist; the peculiarity of Johns narrative consists in this, that the Baptists testimony is obtained in answer to a question asked by the Jews, who send a deputation to him ‘from Jerusalem, the centre of the theocracy.

In this mention of the Jews we meet for the first time with one of the most characteristic terms of the Fourth Gospel. In the other Gospels the expression occurs only fifteen or sixteen times, and twelve of these instances are examples of a single phrase, King of the Jews, and that phrase used by Gentiles. The remaining passages are Mar 7:3; Luk 7:3; Luk 23:51; and Mat 28:15 (slightly different from the rest in the absence of the article). In this Gospelin addition to six examples of the title King of the Jews, used as in the other Gospelswe find more than fifty passages in which the Evangelist himself (not quoting from any Gentile) speaks of the Jews. Had the author of this Gospel been a Gentile, this usage might have seemed very natural; but it is no less natural in the case of a writer who, though a Jew by birth, has long been severed from his countrymen through their rejection of his Lord. The leaders and representatives of the nation in this rejection of Jesus are those whom John usually designates as the Jews. When the other Gospels speak of opposition on the part of Pharisees, chief priests, elders, scribes, Sadducees, or lawyers, John who mentions none of these classes except Pharisees and chief priests, and these not very frequently) is wont to use this general term. The mass of the people, the led as contrasted with the leaders, he speaks of as the multitude or the multitudes. Hence in most of the passages in which we meet with the Jews, we must understand the party possessed of greatest influence in the nation, the representatives of Judaism, the leaders in opposition to Jesus. Even where the term is used in a wider sense, it does not simply designate the nation; when employed by the Evangelist himself, it almost always bears with it the impress of one thoughtthat of general unfaithfulness, of a national depravation which culminated in the crucifixion of the Lord Jesus.

There is nothing to indicate that the deputation here spoken of was sent by the Sanhedrin; but it appears to have been formal and important, composed as it was of persons belonging to the two classes which, in the Old Testament, represent the service of the Temple (Jos 3:3; 2Ch 30:27; Eze 44:15). If we add to this the fact that, as appears from Joh 1:24, Pharisees also were present, the striking character of the scene before us will be manifest. On the one side is the Baptist, standing alone in the startling strangeness of his prophetic mission; on the other are all who either possessed or had assumed religious authority in Israelthe Jews, the priests, the Levites, and the Pharisees. The question, Who art thou? has reference to the supposed personal claims of the Baptist. Might it not be that one who had so suddenly appeared in the wilderness, and who had produced so profound an effect upon all classes, was the very Messiah anxiously waited for at this time? Compare Luk 3:15.

Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament

Subdivision 2. (Joh 1:19-34.)

The witness of faith.

The first eighteen verses are, in fact, the witness of God as to Christ -a revelation. Who could know of the Word in eternity, the Creator; or of the Only-begotten Son in the Father’s bosom, or of the Word incarnate, except by revelation? But now man is given his place, and allowed to tell his story from his own side, -to show how he has come to rejoice in Christ; and we are called now to listen to the Baptist in this character of witness to his Lord.

1. It is a blessed testimony, and shows us, as the other Gospels scarcely do, the bright side of what elsewhere seems a life so shadowed. But in them we see him rather in his witness to the nation -which is, of course, a witness about Christ too; but more in His relation also to the nation and where their present state spoke sadly of what was to be the outcome of his presentation to them. With Pharisees and Sadducees coming out in their hollow fashion to his baptism of repentance, a vipers, brood, as he calls them, his testimony is largely a warning of coming judgment. The axe is already at the root of the trees, and they must not plead their being children of Abraham as exemption from the wrath at hand. He who comes is going to purge His floor and gather (it is true) His wheat into the garner; but the chaff He will burn up with unquenchable fire. Corresponding to all this is the figure of the preacher in the wilderness, his leathern girdle fastened round his garment of hair. Of this aspect of John’s ministry we find here little indeed: for here he is not standing in the presence of the people, but in Another Presence of which he is come to speak. He is standing in the glory of that Light which is in the world, and he is transfigured by it. The austerity has passed out of manner and form, and become the tender abstraction of the worshipper. They come after him, attracted by what they more readily understand, priests and Levites from Jerusalem, seeking the man able thus to stand alone, while with his words he bows the multitudes before him: they find one bowing himself in abasement deeper than that of his stricken hearers. Only not in the shadow, but in the light; not in the alarm of an awakened conscience, but in the joy of a heart that has found its rest in faith.

They came to ask him, “Who art thou?” “And he confessed, and denied not,” says the exultant Spirit; “and he confessed, I am not the Christ.” Was it not, after all, but a small thing to say that? Yes; but it was the manner of his saying it, unasked, as one who knew in his soul that Christ whom men needed, so as to need nothing else. What did it matter what he himself was, when he and they (but in how different fashion) were standing in the presence of His glory; and they ignorant of it? But they go on: “What then? art thou Elias?” And he saith, “I am not.” “Art thou that prophet?” -the Prophet of whom Moses had spoken, and whom they did not know to be Christ also: and he answered, “No;” -shorter and shorter, as one who would be quit of it; but they will not leave it there. “They said to him, therefore, Who art thou? that we may give an answer to them that sent us: what sayest thou of thyself? He said, I am the voice of one crying in the wilderness, Make straight the way of the Lord” -of Jehovah -“as said the prophet Esaias.”

Vox et praeterea nihil: a “voice,” -scarcely a person; a voice whose whole value lies in the message that it brings; a voice, which of necessity must pass away, but which may do a work that shall not pass; here a voice that shall bring to the souls of men the imperishable Word which shall abide for ever. We cannot but realize the voice in John thus to be in suited relation to the Word, which is Christ, and of whom as such the Gospel speaks. Nor is there a moan in this over his mere brief apparition among men. What are men that a name among them and a following from them should be a thing to covet? Nay; but there is a Seeker of men, and for whom they have value, not as aught but as naught; as helpless, astray, lost, ruined. That the speaker knew; and knowing, spoke of it with a joy that would not permit him to be silent, nor permit him to stand before their eyes to hide or lessen the glory which was before his own.

But those who had been sent were of the Pharisees, and they saw nothing; nor, as conscious of their need, did they heed the testimony. They had misinterpreted the ages past, and here was the voice of those ages, and it was strange and distant, and the light in the eyes of him who spoke, had they not seen it before in many a fanatic? But, keen ritualists as they were, they had rightful question with him now, founded on his own confession: for, if he were neither Christ, nor Elias, nor the Prophet, why did he baptize?

In fact, it was a boldness unheard of to impose such a baptism upon Israelites: he a man without miracle to attest him, with nothing indeed save his own unworldly life, and that fervent appeal to the conscience which awoke it to its office, with the startling announcement of heaven’s Kingdom and its King at hand. Meet him on the ground of Scripture or of fact they could not; but it was easier to question his personal right to such a prerogative as he claimed, of which they too were the prescriptive judges. But John answers them in his own strange fashion by an attack upon all ritualism in its very essence. Baptize? yes, he baptized -with water! Water symbolically might have deepest meaning; otherwise it could but put away the filth of the flesh. Water does water’s work: for which its Maker ordained it. Why make much of this, while in the midst of them stood One, unknown, unnoticed, so great that the Baptist, as he declares, was unworthy to do for Him a menial’s office, and had derived from Him all the significance he had.

Thus John was in his person a witness for his Lord. He not merely had a voice to speak for Him: he was that voice. Delivered from the common cravings of men, and standing apart from their contending interests but not their needs, Christ had delivered, Christ sufficed for him. As another could say afterwards, and with fuller intelligence, John could have said in his measure with equal truth, Christ lived in him; Christ’s interests absorbed and energized him. A beautiful testimony! His voice might utter itself in the wilderness; his heart abode amid the “precious fruits brought forth by the Sun” which shone upon him, a man “filled with the Holy Spirit even from his mother’s womb.”

2. But with these men for his hearers John cannot get his heart out; as on their part there is no movement of the heart towards the blessed One of whom he testifies. With other audience upon the morrow his joy breaks out; and we see how fully he is one with all whoever since have found in Jesus the rest and satisfaction of their souls. “He seeth Jesus coming unto him, and saith, Behold the Lamb of God, who taketh away the sin of the world.” Thus we see how his faith has taken refuge in a Sin-bearer and Saviour, the only Saviour of the world. We have at the outset here the broadest view of Christ’s sacrifice, as characteristically throughout the Gospel. The Baptist speaks also of “sin,” not “sins.” That which has been from the time of the fall ever in view in all God’s dealings with the world will through this work be at last completely removed, and eternal righteousness established in its place. Meanwhile the broadest foundation is laid, for every one that will to rest on. Not Israel, not the saints, not even believers as such are given title here, but men as men, sinners with the consciousness of nothing else but sin; for for sinners the sacrifice for sin was offered; and though it be said most truly that only by faith do we receive the fruit of it, yet faith does not eye itself but its object, nor rest in any estimate of one’s own condition (as to which we might be deceived) but upon the sure testimony of the Word both as to our condition and as to that which has met the condition.

Thus John’s confession here is not too broad to allow of the simplest individual appropriation of it. The rock is not too broad to build upon. Every one is welcome: no question raised as to any one who comes; and none need raise a question.

John adds as to this Lamb of sacrifice his confession of Him as a divine Person, repeating his former words. He adds also that he had been (as the world itself) blind as to His glory. Yet that He might be made manifest to Israel was the whole purport of his own mission. It is the consciousness of the condition in which we were, out of which divine love and power alone have brought us that will enable us to rely upon the same grace for others, and upon nothing else but grace.

3. But this is not the whole of John’s testimony. He has seen Christ as a Man marked out by the descent of the Spirit of God upon Him, and had this given to him as the sign by which he should know the One baptizing with the Holy Spirit. He sees and bears witness, therefore, that this is the Son of God.

The oil upon Aaron’s head descends to the skirts of his clothing; and thus is accomplished that unity among brethren of which the Psalmist speaks (Psa 133:1-3.) Now that the oil is the type of the Spirit, with which Christ as the true Aaron is anointed without blood, hardly needs demonstration (Exo 29:7). Every thing combines to show that it was after John’s baptism when the Spirit descended to abide on Christ, as the Baptist beheld it here, that this was fulfilled. (See Mat 3:1-17, notes.) He had bowed in Jordan as the true offering in death for the sins of others, just as the Baptist proclaims Him now the Lamb of God to take away the sin of the world. He is declared, as the Spirit descends upon Him, the Son of God; and that, as the apostle tells us (Heb 5:5), is His call to the priesthood. The baptism of the Spirit is thus His priestly action, the anointing oil flowing down from the Head, which in the psalm produces the unity of brotherhood in Israel, and could not but as fully apply to that of a heavenly people, or to the Church; the Body of Christ is formed by the baptism of the Spirit (1Co 12:13); and though we could not have this as yet developed, for us it is the highest expression of spiritual unity, the fullest manifestation of the power of Christ’s priestly work. It gives completeness to the Baptist’s testimony to our Lord.

Fuente: Grant’s Numerical Bible Notes and Commentary

In these verses we have a second testimony which John the Baptist gave of our Saviour Jesus Christ. The Jews sent priests and Levites from Jerusalem, saying, Who art thou? That is, the Sanhedrin, or great council at Jerusalem, to whom it belonged to judge who were true prophets, sent messengers to the Baptist to know, Whether he was the Messiah or not? John refuses to take this honour to himself, but tells them plainly, he was his harbinger and forerunner, and that the Messias himself was just at hand.

From hence note, How very cautious, and exceeding careful, this messenger of Christ was, and all the ministers of Christ ought to be, that they do not assume or arrogate to themselves any part of that honour which is due to Christ; but set the crown of praise upon Christ’s own head, acknowledging him to be all in all. 1Co 3:5 Who is Paul? and who is Apollos? but ministers by whom ye believed?

Observe farther, In this testimony of John the Baptist, these two things:

1. A negative declaration, who he was not; I am not, says he, the Messiah whom ye look for, nor Elias, nor that prophet you expect: not Elias, that is, in your sense, not Elias the Tishbite; not Elias for identity of person, but Elias for similtude of gifts, office, and calling. John came, though not in the person, yet in the power and spirit, of Elias. He denies farther, that he was that prophet: that prophet which Moses spake of, Deu 18:15 nor any of the old prophets risen from the dead; nay, strictly speaking, he was not any prophet at all; but more than a prophet: The Old Testament prophets prophesied of Christ to come; but John pointed at, showed, and declared a Christ already come; and in this sense he was no mere prophet, but more than a prophet.

2. We have here the Baptist’s positive affirmation who he was; namely, Christ’s herald in the wilderness, his usher, his forerunner to prepare the people for receiving of the Messias, and to make them ready for the entertaining of the gospel, by preaching the doctrine of repentance to them.

From hence learn, That the preaching of the doctrine of repentance is indispensably necessary, in order to the preparing of the hearts of sinners for the receiving of Jesus Christ.

Observe lastly, The great and exemplary humility of the holy Baptist, the mean and lowly opinion he had of himself. Although John was the greatest among them that were born of a woman, and so much esteemed by the Jews, and had the honour to go before Christ in the exercise of his office and ministry; yet he judges himself unworthy to carry Christ’s shoes after him: He that cometh after me is preferred before me, whose shoes I am not worthy to unloose.

Learn hence, That the more eminent gifts the ministers of the gospel have, and the more ready men are to honour and esteem them, the more they will abase themselves, if they be truly gracious, and account themselves highly honoured in doing the meanest offices of love and service for Jesus Christ. Thus doth the holy Baptist here: His shoes’ latchet I am not worthy to unloose.

Fuente: Expository Notes with Practical Observations on the New Testament

Joh 1:19-23. And this is the record of John This is the testimony which he bare publicly to Jesus; when the Jews Namely, the senate, or great council of the nation; sent priests and Levites from Jerusalem Persons of the first consideration for learning and office; to ask him, Who art thou What character dost thou assume to thyself? It is probable, that the reason why the sanhedrim sent these persons, was their having been informed that the Baptists extraordinary sanctity, zeal, and powerful preaching, together with the solemnity of his baptizing, had made such an impression on the people, that they were beginning to think he might be the Messiah. These rulers therefore judged it proper to send persons thus to examine him, because it belonged to them to take cognizance of all matters relating to religion, and especially to judge who were true prophets. And as they were evidently jealous of his increasing popularity, they probably hoped to find in his answers to their questions some pretence for taking measures to silence him, especially as they understood his ministry neither agreed with the Mosaic dispensation which they had been long under, nor with the notions they had formed of the Messiahs kingdom. And he confessed, and denied not, &c. John, according to the natural plainness of his temper, presently replied to their inquiry; I am not the Christ As if he had said, I know that the people begin to look on me as their long- expected deliverer, but I tell you plainly, they are mistaken: nor do I in the least pretend to arrogate to myself the honours which are due to none but him. And they asked him, What then? Art thou Elias Art thou the Prophet Elijah, who, as the Scriptures tell us, is to arise from the dead, and to appear before the coming of the Messiah? And he saith, I am not There was here an apparent contradiction to the words of our Lord concerning John, (Mat 11:14,) This is Elias which was to come. But Jesus, in these words, evidently refers to the prophecy of Mal 4:5; his purpose being to inform his disciples that John was Elijah in the sense of that prophet, and that his prediction was accomplished in the Baptist, inasmuch as he came in the spirit and power of Elijah. But when the question was here proposed to John, the laws of truth required that he should answer it as he did, namely, according to the sense wherein the words were used by the proposers, who expected that the very Prophet Elijah would come in person before the Messiah should appear: a notion which they entertained very early, as is evident from the Septuagint translation of the passage just referred to in Malachi, , literally, Behold, I send you Elias the Tishbite before the day of the Lord come. Therefore the Baptist, on being asked if he was Elias, could not answer otherwise than in the negative, without rendering himself liable to the charge of equivocating. For though the name of Elias did truly belong to the forerunner of the Messiah, Malachi having called him so, John was not the person whom the people expected, and the priests meant, when they asked him, Art thou Elias? He was not that individual prophet returned from heaven to sojourn again upon the earth. It is justly observed by Grotius here, that the persons who made this inquiry show that they were ignorant of the parentage of John the Baptist, or that they were in doubt concerning it; Art thou that prophet Whom Moses has assured us God will raise up, and of whom we are daily in expectation? (Joh 6:14 🙂 or their meaning may have been, Art thou Jeremiah, or any other of the old prophets raised from the dead? for it appears from Mat 16:14, that they thought the Messiah would be preceded by some such extraordinary personage. And he answered, No He was a prophet, but not one of the old prophets raised from the dead, nor had he his revelations by dreams and visions, as the Old Testament prophets had theirs; his commission and work were of another nature, and belonged to another dispensation. Then said they, Who art thou? that we may give an answer, &c. We are sent by the supreme council, who have a right to judge persons pretending a commission from God, as thou seemest to do by baptizing and gathering disciples. It becomes thee, therefore, to give an account of thyself to us, that we may lay it before them who have sent us. And he said, I am the voice of one crying in the wilderness John, instead of giving a description of his own character and office, refers those who questioned him to the words of the Prophet Isaiah, in which they would find it; and what he here says of himself, is to be understood no otherwise than we understand what Matthew says of him, (Mat 3:3,) where see the note. He says, in effect, I am that forerunner of Christ of whom Isaiah speaks, Isa 40:3. Archbishop Fenelon beautifully illustrates the humility of this reply: as if this illustrious prophet had said, Far from being the Messiah, or Elias, or one of the old prophets, I am nothing but a voice; a sound, that as soon as it has expressed the thought, of which it is the sign, dies into air, and is known no more. Dr. Campbell renders the clause, I am he whose voice proclaimeth in the wilderness, &c.; observing that, in such declarations, the general purport is alone regarded by the speaker, and that the words, therefore, ought not to be interpreted too grammatically; interpretations to be formed from the manifest scope, and not from the syntactic structure of sentences, being not unfrequent in Scripture. Thus, Rev 1:12, , literally, I turned to see the voice.

Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

First Section: 1:19-37. The Testimonies of John the Baptist.

These testimonies are three in number and were given on three successive days (see Joh 1:29; Joh 1:35, the next day). These three days, eternally memorable for the Church, had left on the heart of the evangelist an ineffaceable impression. On the first he had heard that solemn declaration made before a deputation of the Sanhedrim: The Messiah is present! (ver.

26); and this word, no doubt, had thrilled him as it had the multitude who were there. The next day, the forerunner, pointing out Jesus, had changed his first declaration into that still more important one: Behold Him! and faith in Jesus, prepared for on the preceding day, had illuminated with its first ray the heart of John and that of the Baptist’s hearers. Finally, on the third day, by repeating his declaration of the day before, the Baptist evidently meant to say: Follow Him! John immediately leaves the Baptist, to attach himself to the new Master whom he points out to him.

Why did the author make the first of these three days the starting-point for his narration? If his intention was to make us witness the opening, not only of his own faith and that of the apostles, but of faith itself in the midst of mankind, he could not choose another starting-point. The Messiah announced, then pointed out, thenfollowed; this certainly is the normal beginning of such a narrative.

Fuente: Godet Commentary (Luke, John, Romans and 1 Corinthians)

XX.

JOHN’S FIRST TESTIMONY TO JESUS.

(Bethany beyond Jordan, February, A. D. 27.)

dJOHN I. 19-34.

d19 And this is the witness of John [John had been sent to testify, “and” this is the matter of his testimony], when the Jews [The term “Jews” is used seventy times by John to describe the ruling classes of Juda] sent unto him [In thus sending an embassy they honored John more than they ever honored Christ. They looked upon John as a priest and Judan, but upon Jesus as a carpenter and Galilan. It is probable that the sending of this investigating committee marks the period when the feelings of the rulers toward John changed from friendliness to hostility. At the first, probably led on by the prophecies of Daniel, these Jews found joy in [101] John’s coming ( Joh 5:33-35). When they attended his ministry in person he denounced their wickedness and incurred their hatred] from Jerusalem priests and Levites [they were commissioned to teach ( 2Ch 15:3, Neh 8:7-9), and it was probably because of their wisdom as teachers that they were sent to question John about his baptism] to ask him, Who art thou? 20 And he confessed, and denied not; and he confessed [The repetition here suggests John’s firmness under repeated temptation. As the questioners ran down the scale from “Christ” to “that prophet,” John felt himself diminishing in their estimation, but firmly declined to take honors which did not belong to him], I am not [in this entire section ( Joh 1:20-24) John places emphasis upon the pronoun “I,” that he may contrast himself with Christ] the Christ [When the apostle John wrote this Gospel it had become fashionable with many of the Baptist’s disciples to assert that the Baptist was the Christ. (Recognitions of Clement 1. 50, 60; Olshausen, Hengstenberg, Godet.) In giving this testimony of the Baptist, John corrects this error; but his more direct purpose is to show forth John’s full testimony, and give the basis for the words of Jesus found at Joh 5:33. The fact that the Jews were disposed to look upon John as the Messiah gave all the greater weight to his testimony; for the more exalted the person of the witness, the weightier are his words. John’s own experience doubtless caused him to feel the influence of the Baptist’s testimony.] 21 And they asked him, What then? Art thou Elijah? [Malachi had declared that Elijah should precede the Messiah ( Mal 4:5). The Jews interpreted this prophecy literally, and looked for the return of the veritable Elijah who was translated ( Mat 17:10). This literal Elijah did return, and was seen upon the Mount of Transfiguration before the crucifixion of our Lord. But the prophecy of Malachi referred to a spiritual Elijah–one who should come “in the spirit and power of Elijah,” and in this sense John fulfilled Malachi’s prediction– Luk 1:17, Mat 11:14, Mat 17:12.] And he saith, I am not [He answered their question according to [102] the sense in which they had asked it. He was not the Elijah who had been translated about nine hundred years before this time.] Art thou the prophet? [Moses had foretold a prophet who should come ( Deu 18:15-18), but the Jews appear to have had no fixed opinion concerning him, for some thought he would be a second Moses, others a second Elijah, others the Messiah. The Scriptures show us how uncertain they were about him ( Mat 16:14, Joh 6:14, Joh 7:40, Joh 7:41). As to Jeremiah being that prophet, see II. Macc. ii. 7. Even Christians disagree as to whether Moses refers to Christ or to a line of prophets. Though divided in opinion as to who this prophet would be, the Jews were fairly unanimous as to what he would do. Finding in their Scriptures two pictures of the Christ, one representing him as a great Conqueror, and the other of his priesthood, setting him forth as a great Sufferer, they took the pictures to refer to two personages, one denoting a king–the Messiah–and the other a prophet. The Jews to this day thus divide the Christ of prophecy, and seek to make him two personages.] And he answered, No. [He was not the prophet, either as he or they understood that term. John gives us a beautiful example of humility. Like Paul, he would not be overvalued– Act 14:13-15, 1Co 1:12, 1Co 1:13.] 22 They said therefore unto him, Who art thou? that we may give an answer to them that sent us What sayest thou of thyself? [Unable to guess his office, they asked him to state it plainly.] 23 He said, I am the voice [It is as though John answered, “You ask who I am. My personality is nothing; my message everything. I shall pass away as a sound passes into silence; but the truth which I have uttered shall abide.” In his answer John shows himself to be the spiritual Elijah, for he declares that he came to do the work of Elijah; viz.: to prepare the people for the advent of Messiah. There are many echoes in the world; but few voices] of one crying in the wilderness, Make straight the way of the Lord [prepare the minds and hearts of the people that Christ may freely enter in], as said Isaiah the prophet. [ Isa 40:3.] 24 And they had been sent were from [103] The Pharisees. [Of all the Jewish sects the Pharisees were most attentive to external rites and ceremonies, and hence would notice John’s baptism more than would others. It is interesting to notice that the Pharisees, who were Christ’s most bitter opponents, were warned of John about the presence of Messiah from the very beginning.] 25 And they asked him, and said unto him, Why then baptizest thou, if thou art not the Christ, neither Elijah, neither the prophet? [If you are no more important personage, who do you presume to introduce any other ordinance than those provided for by the law of Moses? The question shows that to them John’s baptism was a new rite. Even if proselyte baptism then existed at this time (of which there is certainly no sufficient evidence), it differed in two marked ways from John’s baptism: 1. John baptized his converts, while proselytes baptized themselves. 2. John baptized Jews and not Gentiles.] 26 John answered them, saying, I baptize in water: but in the midst of you standeth one whom ye know not, 27 even he that cometh after me [that is, follows in that way which I as forerunner am preparing for him], The latchet of whose shoe I am not worthy to unloose. [The words “standeth” and “shoe” showed that the person of whom the Baptist spoke had a visible, bodily form. To loose the latchet was a peculiarly servile office. The Talmud says,”Every office a servant will do for his master, a scholar should perform for his teacher, except loosing his sandal-thong.” The greatest prophet felt unworthy to render Christ this humble service, but unconverted sinners often presume to serve Christ according to their own will, and fully expect to have their service honored and rewarded. Taken as a whole, the answer of John appears indirect and insufficient. What was there in all this to authorize him to baptize? This appears to be his meaning: “You demand my authority for baptism. It rests in him for whom I prepare the way. It is a small matter to introduce baptism in water for one so worthy. If you accept him, my baptism will need no explanation; and if you reject him, my rite and its authority are both wholly [104] immaterial.”] 28 These things were done in Bethany beyond the Jordan [Owing to variation in the manuscripts, we may read “Bethany” or “Bethabara,” or even possibly “Bethabara in Bathania.” Tradition fixes upon the Jericho ford, which is about five miles on an air line north of the Dead Sea, as the site of Jesus’ baptism. But this spot is eighty miles from Cana of Galilee, and hence Jesus, leaving it on foot, could not well have attended the wedding in Cana on “the third day” ( Joh 2:1). We must therefore look for Bethany or Bethabara farther up the river. John the Baptist was a roving preacher ( Luk 3:3), and during the forty days of Jesus’ temptation seems to have moved up the river Jordan. Fifty miles above the Jericho ford, and ten miles south of the Sea of Galilee, Lieutenant Conder found a ford named ‘Abarah (meaning “ferry”), which answers to Bethabara (meaning “house of the ferry”). It was in the land of Bashan, which in the time of Christ was called Bathania (meaning “soft soil”). This spot is only twenty-two miles from Cana. Being beyond the Jordan, it is not in Galilee, as Dr. Thomson asserts. Conder says: “We have collected the names of over forty fords, and no other is called ‘Abarah; nor does the word occur again in all nine thousand names collected by the survey party.”] where John was baptizing. 29 On the morrow he seeth Jesus coming unto him [Jesus had just returned from the temptation in the wilderness. This is his first appearance in John’s Gospel. The fact that John leaves out all the early history of Jesus shows that he wrote many years after the other evangelists, when all these facts were so well known as to need no mention by him], and saith, Behold, the Lamb of God [Lambs were commonly used for sin-offerings ( Lev 4:32), and three of them were sacrificed in the cleansing of a leper ( Lev 14:10). A lamb was also the victim of the morning (9 A.M.) and evening (3 P.M.) sacrifice ( Exo 29:38)–the hours when Jesus was nailed to the cross and when he expired. A lamb was also the victim at the paschal supper. The great prophecy of Isaiah, setting forth the vicarious sacrifice of Christ ( Isa 53:1-12) depicts him as a lamb, and in [105] terms which answer closely to the words here used by John. The Jews to whom John spoke readily understood his allusion as being to sacrificial lambs; but they could not understand his meaning, for they had no thought of the sacrifice of a person. Jesus is called the Lamb of God because he is the lamb or sacrifice which God provided and accepted as the true and only sin-offering– Heb 10:4-14, 1Pe 1:19], that taketh away the sin of the world! [The present tense, “taketh,” is used because the expiatory effect of Christ’s sacrifice is perpetual, and the fountain of his forgiveness never fails. Expiated sin is this spoken of as being taken away ( Lev 10:17, Exo 34:7, Num 14:18). Some, seeking to avoid the vicarious nature of Christ’s sacrifice, claim that the Baptist means that Jesus would gradually lift the world out of sin by his teaching. But lambs do not teach, and sin is not removed by teaching, but by sacrifice ( Heb 9:22, Rev 5:9). Jesus was sacrificed for the world, that is, for the entire human family in all ages. All are bought, but all do not acknowledge the purchase ( 2Pe 2:1). He gives liberty to all, but all do not receive it, and some having received it return again to bondage ( Gal 4:9). The Baptist had baptized for the remission of sins. He now points his converts to him who would make this promise good unto their souls. A Christian looks upon Christ as one who has taken away his past sin ( 1Pe 2:24), and who will forgive his present sin– 1Jo 1:9.] 30 This is he of whom I said [for this saying see Joh 1:15, Joh 1:27], After me cometh a man which is preferred before me: for he was before me. [As a man John was six months older than Jesus, but Jesus was the eternal Word. The Baptist therefore asserts here the pre-existence of our Lord.] 31 And I knew him not [had no such certain knowledge of him as would fit me to testify concerning him]; but that he should be made manifest to Israel, for this cause came I baptizing in water. [John baptized not only that he himself might know Christ by the spiritual sign, but also that through that knowledge duly published all Israel might know him.] 32 And John bare witness, [106] saying, I have beheld the Spirit descending as a dove out of heaven; and it abode upon him. [The descent of the Spirit served at least two purposes: 1. It enabled John to identify the Messiah. 2. It was, so to speak, an official recognition of Jesus as Messiah similar to the anointing or crowning of a king. It is asserted by some that it was of no benefit to Jesus, since his own divine powers permitted of no addition; but the language of Scripture indicates otherwise– Isa 11:2, Isa 11:3, Luk 4:17-19, Joh 3:34.] 33 And I knew him not [John’s assertions that he did not know Jesus are assertions that he did not know him to be the Messiah. He believed it, as appears from his reluctance to baptize him, but he did not know it. His language to the people shows this ( Joh 1:26). Many of the people must have known Jesus, but none of them knew him to be the Messiah. Moreover, when John denied that he knew Jesus as Messiah we must not take it that he was ignorant of the past history of Jesus. No doubt he knew in a general way who Jesus was; but as the official forerunner and announcer of Jesus, and as the heaven-sent witness ( Joh 1:6, Joh 1:7), it was necessary that the Baptist should receive, by personal revelation from God, as here stated, an indubitable, absolute knowledge of the Messiahship of Jesus. Without this, John would not have been truly qualified as a witness. That Jesus is the Son of God must not rest on hearsay evidence. John kept silent till he could testify of his own knowledge]: but he that sent me [thus humbly does John claim his divine commission as a prophet] to baptize in water, he said unto me, Upon whomsoever thou shalt see the Spirit descending, and abiding upon him [John seems to emphasize the abiding of the Spirit. The Spirit of God was also bestowed upon the prophets and the apostles, but in them his power was intermittent, and not constant; visions came to them intermittently, but with Christ the fellowship of the Spirit was continuous], the same is he that baptizeth in the Holy Spirit. [Christ bestows the Spirit upon his own. If he himself received the Spirit at the time of his baptism, why should [107] it be thought strange that he bestows the Spirit upon his disciples at the time of their baptism?–See Act 2:38, Act 19:1-7, Tit 3:5.] 34 And I have seen [that is, I have seen the promised sign], and have borne witness that this is the Son of God. [This is the climax of John’s testimony. It was twofold, embracing the results of the two senses of sight and hearing. 1. John saw the dove-like apparition of the Spirit, which convinced him that Jesus was the one to baptize in the Spirit. 2. He heard the voice of the Father, which convinced him that Jesus was the Son of God. As to each of these two facts he had a separate revelation, appealing to a different sense, and each given by the personage of the Deity more nearly concerned in the matter revealed. John was not only to prepare the people to receive Christ by calling them to repentance, and baptizing them for the remission of their sins; there was another work equally great and important to be performed. Their heads as well as their hearts needed his preparatory services. His testimony ran counter to and corrected popular opinion concerning Christ. We see that John corrected four errors: 1. The Jews looked for a Messiah of no greater spiritual worthiness than John himself, but the Baptist disclaimed even the right to unlace the Lord’s shoe, that he might emphasize the difference between himself and the Messiah in point of spiritual excellency. 2. The Jews looked for one who would come after Moses, David, and the prophets, and lost sight of the fact that he would be before them, both in point of time and of honor ( Mat 22:41-46). 3. The Jews looked for a liberator from earthly bondage–a glorious king; John pointed them to a liberator from spiritual bondage, a perfect sacrifice acceptable to God. 4. The Jews looked for a human Messiah, a son of David. John enlarged their idea, by pointing them to a Messiah who was also the Son of God. When the Jews accept John’s guidance as a prophet, they will believe in the Messiahship of Jesus.] [108]

[FFG 101-108]

Fuente: McGarvey and Pendleton Commentaries (New Testament)

Joh 1:19-27. The Baptists Witness about Himself.Instead of recounting the work and mission of the Baptist, as the other gospels, the writer selects incidents which show him as the Witness. These incidents are certainly told in terms which reflect later Christian thought. But they contain much that does not obviously contribute to the writers special purpose, and which suggests real knowledge or at least trustworthy tradition. If several of Jesus earliest disciples were followers of the Baptist, the prominence assigned to his ministry in the Synoptic account receives a natural explanation. The Jews, the religious party of the nation, strenuous for the Law and tradition, are anxious about the new religious movement, and send a commission, apparently instigated by the Pharisees (Joh 1:24), though consisting of (?) Sadducean priests and Levites. John declares that he is neither Messiah nor even one of His expected precursors (Mal 4:5, Deu 18:15), and describes his own position in the words of Isa 40:3. To their surprise that such an one should baptize he answers that his baptism is only a purificatory and preliminary rite. A greater than he is among them though they know Him not. The site of this incident (Bethany, according to the true text) is unknown. At a comparatively early date (Origen, and the earliest Syr. Version) the name Bethabara was substituted.

Fuente: Peake’s Commentary on the Bible

Verse 19

The record; the testimony.

Fuente: Abbott’s Illustrated New Testament

1:19 {11} And this is the record of John, when the Jews sent priests and Levites from Jerusalem to ask him, Who art thou?

(11) John is neither the Messiah, nor like any of the other prophets, but is the herald of Christ, who is now present.

Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes

A. The prelude to Jesus’ public ministry 1:19-51

The rest of the first chapter continues the introductory spirit of the prologue. It records two events in John the Baptist’s ministry and the choice of some men as Jesus’ followers.

Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)

II. JESUS’ PUBLIC MINISTRY 1:19-12:50

The first part of the body of John’s Gospel records Jesus’ public ministry to the multitudes in Palestine, who were primarily Jewish. Some writers have called this section of the Gospel "the book of signs" because it features seven miracles that signify various things about Jesus.

"Signs are miraculous works performed or mentioned to illustrate spiritual principles." [Note: Tenney, "The Symphonic . . .," p. 119. See also idem, "Topics from the Gospel of John," Bibliotheca Sacra 132:526 (April-June 1975):145-60, for a discussion of the seven signs in John’s Gospel.]

Often John recorded a lengthy discourse that followed the miracle, in which Jesus explained its significance to the crowds. This section also contains two extended conversations that Jesus had with two individuals (chs. 3 and 4).

"The opening of the narrative proper might well be understood as the account of the happenings of one momentous week. John does not stress the point, but he does give notes of time that seem to indicate this. The first day is taken up with a deputation from Jerusalem that interrogates the Baptist. ’The next day’ we have John’s public pointing out of Jesus (Joh 1:29-34). Day 3 tells of two disciples of the Baptist who followed Jesus (Joh 1:35-40). It seems probable that Joh 1:41 takes us to day 4 . . . It tells of Andrew’s bringing of Peter to Jesus. Day 5 is the day when Philip and Nathanael come to him (Joh 1:43-51). The marriage in Cana is two days after the previous incident (i.e., the sixth and seventh days, Joh 2:1-11). If we are correct in thus seeing the happenings of one momentous week set forth at the beginning of this Gospel, we must go on to ask what significance is attached to this beginning. The parallel with the days of creation in Genesis 1 suggests itself, and is reinforced by the ’In the beginning’ that opens both chapters. Just as the opening words of this chapter recall Genesis 1, so it is with the framework. Jesus is to engage in a new creation. The framework unobtrusively suggests creative activity." [Note: Morris, p. 114.]

Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)

1. John the Baptist’s veiled testimony to Jesus 1:19-28

The writer recorded John the Baptist’s witness to Jesus’ identity as preparation for his narration of Jesus’ public ministry. He was the first of the Apostle John’s witnesses to the Incarnation.

Previously the writer had mentioned that God had sent John the Baptist to bear witness concerning the light (Joh 1:6-8). He also mentioned what John had said about Jesus, namely, that Jesus had a higher rank than he did (Joh 1:15). Now the evangelist explained John the Baptist’s witness in more detail.

Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)

This verse explains the context in which John the Baptist explained his own identity in relation to Jesus. As the Synoptics reveal, John’s ministry was so influential that the Jewish religious authorities investigated him (Mat 3:5-6). The Sanhedrin probably sent the delegation of priests and Levites. The priests were descendants of Aaron who took the leadership in matters of theological and practical orthodoxy, including ritual purity. The Levites descended from Levi, one of Aaron’s ancestors, and assisted the priests in their ministry, mainly in the areas of temple music and security. [Note: Carson, p. 142.]

"The Jews" is a term that John used 71 times, in contrast to the other evangelists who used it rarely. Usually in John it refers to Jewish people who were hostile to Jesus, though occasionally it occurs in a neutral sense (e.g., Joh 2:6) or in a good sense (e.g., Joh 4:22). Most often, however, it refers to the Jews of Judea, especially those in and around Jerusalem, who constituted the organized and established religious world apart from faith in Jesus. Consequently it usually carries overtones of hostility to Jesus. [Note: Morris, p. 115.]

Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)