3:1-12 Story About John the Baptist
Matthew 3: 1-12 (Year A Second Sunday of Advent) is story about John the Baptist.
Historical information about John the Baptist is sparse, both within and outside of the Bible. The only non-New Testament reference is in Josephus, Antiquities of the Jews, Book XVIII, Chapter 5, Section 2.
2. Now some of the Jews thought that the destruction of Herod's army came from God, and that very justly, as a punishment of what he did against John, that was called the Baptist: for Herod slew him, who was a good man, and commanded the Jews to exercise virtue, both as to righteousness towards one another, and piety towards God, and so to come to baptism; for that the washing [with water] would be acceptable to him, if they made use of it, not in order to the putting away [or the remission] of some sins [only], but for the purification of the body; supposing still that the soul was thoroughly purified beforehand by righteousness. Now when [many] others came in crowds about him, for they were very greatly moved [or pleased] by hearing his words, Herod, who feared lest the great influence John had over the people might put it into his power and inclination to raise a rebellion, (for they seemed ready to do any thing he should advise,) thought it best, by putting him to death, to prevent any mischief he might cause, and not bring himself into difficulties, by sparing a man who might make him repent of it when it would be too late. Accordingly he was sent a prisoner, out of Herod's suspicious temper, to Macherus, the castle I before mentioned, and was there put to death. Now the Jews had an opinion that the destruction of this army was sent as a punishment upon Herod, and a mark of God's displeasure to him.
Applied to today, we might consider that the evangelical address of the church is in the situation and function of John the Baptist, which is also a voice crying in the wilderness, preparing the way of the Lord, and baptizing with water. The church is not worthy to unloose the shoes of its Lord. The church has the duty of summoning people to knowledge of Christ and readiness for baptism with the Spirit.[1]
Verses 1-6 (Mark 1:1-6, Luke 3:4-6) John preached that the end of the age was at hand and called on people to repent.[2] John the Baptist came to the desolate and hilly region of Judea, stretching from the ridge of Palestine to the Jordan valley and the Red Sea, urging people to repent (Μετανοεῖτε) for the kingdom of heaven has come near (ἤγγικεν). His message underscores the significance of his appearance. However, this significance is not because of his call to repent, which the prophets and even King Solomon urged upon people (I Kings 8:46-53; Isaiah 1:27; Ezekiel 14:6; 18:30). Such repentance involves renunciation of sin, regret over a past life that leads to a conversion to a new way of life. It involves turning around or a change of direction. These are the pre-conditions for receiving the salvation offered through the rule of God. The kingdom of heaven expresses the Jewish in the first century to refer to God. The distinctiveness of John's proclamation resides in the reason for repenting. Here we more likely find the significance is more likely in the timing of the arrival of the rule of God. The rule of God is no longer a future event that remains somewhere off in the distance. Instead, the perfect tense of the verb suggests that John's announcement reveals for the first time that the "kingdom of heaven" is a present reality; consequently, he calls all to repent. Matthew invites us to view the arrival of John as a fulfillment of the words of one of the greatest prophets of Israel in Isa 40:3. John is preparing the people for the coming of the Lord, which for Matthew and his readers would mean the coming of Jesus. John reminds us that the advent of the Lord is a revelation of who we are and the consequences of character and conduct that await us. Matthew intentionally uses common phrases for the essence of the message John preached. In Zech 13:4 prophets had “a hairy mantle,” while II Kings 1:8 describes Elijah the Tishbite as a hairy man with a leather belt around his waist. Malachi 4:5-6 looks forward to the expectation that Elijah would return at the end of the age. Everything about John reflects the fulfillment of scripture related to the eschatological appearing of Elijah. John's concern for his own basic needs was so insignificant that he was content to subsist on whatever he could lay his hands on in that open country. Bedouins also eat such food. John represents a wilderness ascetic movement of this time prior to 30 AD. The apocalyptic fervor of the day fueled his preaching. He may have had some connection with the Essenes, a Jewish sect that authored and housed the Dead Sea Scrolls, texts that combined apocalyptic thought and an ascetic way of way of life. People came from Jerusalem, Judea, and along the Jordan River, responding to the moral summons to turn away from sin (ἁμαρτίας) by receiving baptism in the Jordan, receiving washing, cleansing, and new life. Such a response requires the honesty of admitting sin, wandering, and lying. Sin is missing the mark, although at its heart, it is a refusal to become fully human. It is anything that interferes with the opening of the whole heart to God, to others, to creation, and to the self. Sin is estrangement, disconnection, sterility, and disharmony. Such honesty discloses consciousness of darkness within.
Why is John baptizing at all? Such baptism was a ritual lustration with roots already established within Jewish practice. Ritual washings in mikva'ot (immersion baths or pools) were commonplace, and people believed that this practice cleansed the body of its chronic profanity and sanctified it for worship of God. Ritual purification with water was an important feature of Israelite religion, particularly regarding the impurity associated with various aspects of sexuality (e.g., intercourse and childbirth; see, e.g., Leviticus 15:18; Numbers 19:13). Ritual practices were widespread in Greco-Roman religion also, especially in cults associated with healing deities. Immersion in water, of either the whole body or parts, was a widely practiced means of ritual purification. Such rituals were part of the daily practice of the Essene community, and other groups used them more restrictively to mark significant transitions in life. There is also evidence that other groups in the region of the Jordan Valley were practicing forms of ritual immersion during this period, as well as evidence that a Jewish practice of proselyte baptism as part of an initiation ritual began sometime in the first century of the Common Era. Josephus suggests that people understood John’s baptism as precisely this kind of ritual purification, specifically of the body, because the soul had already been purified by righteous conduct.[3] Therefore, while the practice of ritual purification with water did not originate with John the Baptist.
However, John invited the Jewish people to submit to his baptism.[4] Submitting to baptism was a concrete expression of the act of repentance. It initiated people into a new community. Such confession took place before or during baptism. It involves a form of surrender, acknowledging you are on the wrong track, and ready to start a new life.[5]
Verses 7-10 (Luke 3:7-9) involves a procession of Pharisees and Sadducees approaching John. John opposed the same religious groups that would set themselves against Jesus, Matthew incorporating John into the gospel story. Pharisees were rigid observers of the law and attached themselves to oral tradition. Paul is proud of his heritage as a Pharisee and Jesus did have several friends among them. Jesus' looseness with the law and association with sinners made them natural enemies. The Sadducees were less devout than the Pharisees and more politically minded. These two theologically diverse groups felt they represented a kind of elite corps within the Jewish community. When they came near, John swiftly painted both groups with the same insulting brush-off.[6] They are a brood of vipers. Of the more than 30 species of snakes found in Israel, more than half a dozen of them are venomous, and six of these are in the class of vipers. All can deliver fatal bites, which is one of the principal reasons for their appearance in the biblical text as metaphors for surprising treachery and danger (e.g., Gen 49:17; Job 20:16; Ps 140:3; Isa 30:6; 59:5; Matt 12:34; 23:33). In only one instance (Acts 28:3), the word viper appears in its literal zoological sense. The image may make several rhetorical points simultaneously. He emphasizes the collective nature of the opposition to John’s ministry and, with that collectivity, he points to the strength that comes in numbers; he points to the colluding nature of the opposition parties; and he points forward to the idea of offspring, which follows immediately.
John wonders who warned them to flee the wrath to come, which those baptized hope to escape,[7] the retribution of the day of the Lord inaugurating the messianic era. “The Judge of all the earth” (Gen 18:25) has a will for that earth and its inhabitants which is not morally neutral: “Seek good and not evil, that you may live; and so the Lord, the God of hosts, will be with you” (Amos 5:14). Here is the key to understanding the purpose of the baptism of John. John used baptism to gather those who were prepared to repent into the eschatological people of God, saving them from condemnation at the last judgment. He set aside trust in the prerogatives of Israel. His summons to repent, be baptized, and be saved led to a great movement of repentance and revival. Crowds gathered in the deserted Jordan valley where he baptized.[8] From its earliest days, Israel understood itself to be a religious and social community constituted and maintained by the gracious favor of its God, whose will for righteous behavior placed Israel, no less than are any of its neighbors, under divine judgment. The poles of divine favor and divine judgment played alternating prominent roles in Israel’s history, and John’s attack on the people’s smug self-confidence in their birthright has the intent of challenging the excessive importance some members of the religious community had attached to their election as heirs of the promise made to Abraham (Gen 12:1-3; 17:4-8; 22:18). III Isaiah, writing during the Persian Exile, had already challenged the idea of exclusive privilege being the prerogative of those capable of participating through biological reproduction in the religious community. In a famous oracle addressed to eunuchs and foreigners (Isaiah 56:1-8), the prophet declared that those incapable of passing on the promise through physical progeny were nonetheless welcome members of the religious community based on their obedience to the commandments. Such a radical change in perception in Israelite religion played a key role in laying the foundation for such groups as the Essenes and early Christians, whose views on marriage and reproduction were in stark contrast to the dominant Pharisaic view (see, e.g., Matthew 19:12; 22:30; Acts 8:27-39). The qualified importance attached to children by the time of John is evident in this passage. Their status as the people of God will have no merit. Many scholars read the negative comments concerning the benefits of an Abrahamic genealogy as an indictment of the entire temple/cultus tradition. Some scholars suggest it is a negative comment concerning the bankruptcy of Torah observance. John removes false securities. An attempt to constrain God by magic, ritual, amulets, sacraments, or Law, is what religion tries to do. In the minds of many Jewish people, God guaranteed the covenantal blessings through Abraham.
Instead of sinners seeking repentance, the Baptist portrays the rigorously righteous as a slither of snakes trying to slip out of a blazing field or a fiery future. In urging them to bear the fruit of worthy of repentance, he is expecting some type of visible change to adhere to those who underwent his baptism. He wants them to take their life with God seriously. Once more invoking their common past, the Baptist denies that an Abrahamic genealogy gives an individual any exclusive access to the kingdom now drawing near. John removes false securities. He does so with the image of the proverbial worthlessness of the stone, from which God can cause to arise in or be born in history. The image is based upon Isa 51:1-2, where Abraham is compared with a rock, and his descendants with stones hewn out of the rock. However, this metaphor rejects with cutting severity the Jewish dogma that salvation depends on lineage. If those who are children of Abraham by racial descent refuse to repent, then God can again cause children of Abraham to come forth from the rock, that is, from the spiritually dead, which may hint at the promise to the Gentiles.[9] Thus, the axe is laying at the root of the tree, indicating the judgment process has already actually begun, and every tree that does not bear good fruit will be cut down and cast into the fire. No matter what one's pedigree, or how conscientious, "by‑the‑book," one's behavior, without "fruits," God's wrath is sure and God's judgment is imminent. The judgment process has already actually begun. Thus, instead of boasting about your family tree, John preaches, look to the tips of your own branches. Do you see good fruit there? Is your life producing something useful? Does your life nourish others with its fruits? If not, John insists, no matter how deep and impressive the root system, no matter how lofty the lineage, a non-producing tree can look forward to only one fate: cut down and burned in a fire. God's judgment has overtaken those who feel secure. Nevertheless, how are they to know salvation? He has shattered illusions.
Verses 11-12 (Luke 3:15-18 and Mark 1:7-8) refers to the one to come. We have a messianic saying, containing the only implicit denial of messiahship by John in the Synoptic Gospels. The attention shifts from the message of John to the identity of John, in which he clarifies that he is finding his identity in the coming One. John directs attention to the future. He identifies his baptism as with water for repentance. John animates his message with a poignant moving picture. Instead of waxing eloquent about the greatness of the One to come, John invokes the image of a relationship familiar to his listeners. In applying the saying about the mightier one to Jesus, it stresses the inferiority of John to Jesus.[10] He distinguishes his work with the mission of the one to come.[11] In the first-century world of master-teachers, revered rabbis and their schools of loyal students and disciples, a seriously devoted student would dog his teacher's steps, following him wherever he went. Every aspect of a great rabbi's life was worthy of observation and emulation by a truly dedicated student. However, a well-known rabbinical saying drew a distinct line in the sand between the actions expected of a zealous disciple and the labors accorded to a common body slave. This saying proscribed that "every work which a slave performs for his lord, a disciple must do for his teacher, except loosening his shoe." John, of course, promptly capitalizes on that very distinction. He not only declares himself unworthy to perform that slave-like function of loosening his successor's sandal, but also finds himself too unworthy even to "carry his sandals." The point of the saying is to measure John by the greatness of the one to come. His office is comparable to that of a slave. He does what he is under obligation to do.[12] The recurring fire image that has been flickering throughout John's discourse now bursts into full flame. John the Baptist's message is one of repentance in the face of harsh judgment. The final images in these verses offer a vision of God's future activity. Even the differences between John's baptism and the baptism offered by this "one to come" move from a water image to an image that combines the "Holy Spirit" with "fire." The preaching of John the Baptist proclaimed that the coming One would baptize with the Spirit and with fire, showing that the work of the Spirit stands related to the executing of judgment. Baptism with the Spirit contrasts with the baptism of John himself, which is with water.[13] The idea of baptism “with the Holy Spirit” plays a minor role in the gospels (appearing only in this passage and its parallels and John 1:33). However, spiritual baptism played a significant role in the early Christian church, with baptism with water was the outward sign of this prior spiritual change (i.e., repentance), e.g., Peter’s question concerning the Gentile converts in Acts 10:47: “Can anyone withhold the water for baptizing these people who have received the Holy Spirit just as we have?” The book of Acts is also the only place outside the gospels that refers explicitly to baptism with the Holy Spirit (1:5; 8:16 [by negative inference]; 11:16; compare I Cor 12:13). The preaching of John the Baptist proclaimed that the coming Son of Man would baptize with the Spirit and with fire, showing that the work of the Spirit stands related to the executing of judgment. As noted, baptism with the Spirit contrasts with the baptism of John himself, which is with water.[14] John takes an unremarkable image - the familiar rural Palestinian scene of a farmer scrupulously winnowing out the chaff from his wheat harvest and burning up that worthless residue - and couples it with a harrowing image of divine judgment that practices the same winnowing technique on the lives of both obedient and willful men and women. In threshing, workers toss the grain into the air. The heavier kernels fall to the ground while the wind blows the chaff away. The chaff image usually involves being blown away by the wind (e.g., Job 13:25; 21:18; Psalm 1:4; 35:5; 83:13; Isaiah 17:13; 29:5; Jeremiah 13:24; etc.). This is the only passage in the New Testament in which chaff appears. This chaff, however, will burn in unquenchable fire. "The fire that never goes out" (Isaiah 34:10, 66:29) fits the last judgment. Such unquenchable fire destroys that which resists the purifying effects of water and fire. Baptism is a summons to do right. The coming One will bring judgment, so those who hear this message are to fear being chaff.
The contrasting image of the wheat destined for safe storage with the chaff burned up in the fire is so graphic that we are apt to miss some of the subtlety of this text. First, we should note that the threshing floor is the object of the cleansing John describes -- not the wheat or the chaff. If the floor of the granary is the focus of the Messiah's attention, he has already separated the wheat and chaff. The tool referred to, ptuon, is a winnowing shovel--the instrument used to gather quickly the piles of wheat and chaff that workers have separated and left on the threshing room floor. A thrinaz, or true winnowing fork, would have been used previously -- lifting the wheat and chaff high into the air to let the worthless chaff fall free while holding on to the precious stalks of wheat.[15] The image suggests that claiming or rejecting the Baptist’s prior message of repentance has already designated his listeners as "wheat" or "chaff." The Messiah's task, as he clears the threshing floor, is to offer judgment (the all-consuming fire) or salvation (the haven of the granary) to those who stand before him. There was another One yet to come. To the listeners of John the Baptist, this reference meant eschatology, promising a time of both cleansing salvation and fiery judgment. The spirit of burning and judgment will cleanse Zion. The Lord will visit Israel like the flame of a devouring fire, their enemies becoming like small dust and flying chaff. The tongue of the Lord is like a devouring fire to sift the nations with the sieve of destruction.[16]
John's use of apocalyptic images has led some scholars to suspect John may have expected at this point a fiery "Day of the Lord" as had the prophet Malachi. Fire is often a reliable sign of the presence of God. God speaks to Moses out of the burning bush; a pillar of fire guides the people of Israel through the wilderness after their escape from Egypt; when Moses goes up on Mount Sinai to get the Ten Commandments from God, it looks to those down below as if the mountain fire is devouring it. This is not safe fire; it can still burn and kill. However, it is God’s own fire, the fire of God’s presence, fire that wants to speak to us, guide us, instruct us, save us. It is the fire of a potter who wants to make useful vessels out of damp clay. It is the fire of a jeweler who wants to refine pure gold from rough ore. It does not have to be the fire of destruction. It is the fire in which the coming One will baptize.[17]
Despite his harsh appearance and demanding message, John’s preaching appears to have been popular with many of his contemporaries (Mark 1:5; 11:32; Matt 3:5), and the Jewish historian Josephus reports that many Jewish people had a high regard John (Antiquities 18.5). John’s practice of baptism, moreover, made the ritual of initiation into the body of the elect available to women as well as to men (who, through the ritual of circumcision, had formerly been the only full members of the covenant). Prostitutes and tax collectors, as well as soldiers, were among those who responded to John’s call to repentance and baptism (Matt 21:32; Luke 3:12; 7:29). As radical as his message appeared, John rooted his message firmly in the prophetic tradition of ancient Israel. The teaching of John finds it parallel in many ways by the collection of oracles and writings in the book of Isaiah. Matthew also records that John, like Jesus after him, took an aggressively critical stance toward the Jewish leadership of the temple in Jerusalem (named in Matthew as the Pharisees and Sadducees, 3:7; but cf. Luke 3:7-14), who also came to John for baptism, provoking a scathing rebuke from John. There is no question, however, that John intended his message of repentance to extend to all segments of Judean society without distinction, including the king (Mark 6:18), which is why, at the start of this passage, John is in prison (v. 2). Matthew 14:3-4 record the reasons for John’s imprisonment. According to all three synoptic gospels (Matt 14:3-4; Mark 6:17-18; Luke 3:19-20), Herod Antipas, son of Herod the Great, had John imprisoned John because of his criticism of Herod. He was also tetrarch from 4 B.C. to A.D. 39 of Galilee and Perea (the area of the Jordan Valley and the Dead Sea centered around Jericho). From the complicated family history of the Herod's, the New Testament records that John had rebuked Herod for marrying (or desiring to marry) Herodias, wife of one Philip (but probably not Herod’s half-brother Philip, who was tetrarch of Batanea, Trachonitis and Auranitis, who was never married to Herodias). Herodias was the half-niece of Herod. Jewish law (Leviticus 18:6-16; 20:21) prohibited such a union. John’s repeated reminders of this fact (Matthew 14:4, “John had been telling him”) resulted in his imprisonment and eventual execution (Matthew 14:3-12 and parallels).
That John surrounded himself with a circle of disciples was neither remarkable nor unknown to the gospel writers (e.g., Matthew 14:12), and John’s lifestyle, including his disciples, may have been the model for Jesus’ own ministry later. The circle of John’s disciples may also have furnished some of Jesus’ disciples, and the similarities between the two leaders may have caused some confusion and even rivalry among their followers.
[1]
[2] Matthew differs from Mark to emphasizing geography and historical data, while Mark is more interested in John's message.
[3] (Antiquities 18.117 [cf.18.5.2])
[4] (see further, Anchor Bible Dictionary, 1:584).
[5] Lewis, C.S. "The perfect penitent."
[6]
[7] Stahlin, TDNT, V, 436-7.
[8]
[9] Jeremias, TDNT, IV, 270-1.
[10]
[11] Grundmann, TDNT, III, 399
[12] Rengstorf, TDNT, III, 294.
[13]
[14]
[15] (For more on this distinction, see Robert L. Webb, "The Activity of John the Baptist's Expected Figure at the Threshing Floor," Matthew 3:12, Luke 3:17," Journal for the Study of the New Testament, 43, 1991, 103-111.)
[16] Isaiah 4:4; Isaiah 29:5-6; Isaiah 30:27-28.
[17]
No comments:
Post a Comment