Chapter 3 - The Nature of John’s Ministry
|
John,
Luke tells us, preached to the people the “good news” (Gospel) of
the baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins (Lk. 3:3 and
3:18). Luke tells us that John engaged in a ministry of preparation.
In addressing the people, Luke tells us, he was (quoting from the
prophet Isaiah) “The voice of one crying in the wilderness: ‘Prepare
the way of the Lord, make his paths straight.’” In other words, his
was the voice of the harbinger of the Kingdom, alerting the people
to the near-at-hand appearance of the Messiah.
Preparation for the Messianic rule, John emphasized, called for
radical change on behalf of those who hoped to welcome that Kingdom
into their midst, for the Kingdom itself would be of a radical kind.
It would be a Kingdom that would bring about a radical reversal in
human fortunes: “Every valley shall be filled, and every mountain
and hill shall be made low, and the crooked shall be made straight,
and the rough ways shall be made smooth” (Lk. 2:5). In other words,
the Messianic rule would be one in which the judgment of Heaven
would fall on all forms of human evil, social or political, or
religious. In place of the old, Heaven would impose its own rule of
righteousness, equity and justice. |
Quite apart from his actual message (which we will discuss in detail)
John also gives strong emphasis to the revolutionary role he plays by the
place in which he chooses to conduct his ministry: the desert. John’s
choice (as we will see) appears to have been based on the symbolic
importance of the desert in the history of the people. If so, it was a
wise choice on John’s part.
We will remember that it was in the wilderness that Israel entered into
its historic covenant with God. It was there the Law was given and with it
the pattern of life in Israel established for centuries to come. It was in
the wilderness that she began her journey with God as a people of the
covenant and bound herself to the service of God. The wilderness, then, is
a place of special significance for a covenant people, a place of
spiritual birth and a historically binding relationship with God.
What better place, then, to prepare God’s people for a
spiritual re-birth and for new beginnings? John, we can say, is a prophet
who, like a modern Moses, will start the people on a new religious journey
that will eventually bring them to the foot of a new mountain (Mt. Olive)
where they will receive the words of the new covenant from the mouth of
the Messianic Lawgiver himself (Matt. 5:1).
The preparatory (introductory) nature of John’s ministry
to Christ is perhaps given its strongest expression in the New Testament
in the Gospel of John where John is made to point to Jesus as, “The Lamb
of God who takes away the sin of the world” (Jn. 1:29) and when John
confides in his audience that his ministry has had but one purpose to it:
he has been sent, he tells his audience, “That he [Jesus] might be
revealed to Israel” (Jn. 1:31). “Revealed” truths, however, are only
accessible to those who view these events through the eyes of faith. Of
himself, Jesus said, John was “a burning and a shining light,” a divine
revelation, an ephiphany of a particular kind; a clear witness of God’s
intention in Jesus Christ. But to unbelieving eyes, the testimony of John,
as self-evident as it was to the eyes of faith, went unacknowledged and
unaccepted; he was for the unbelieving a mere “reed blown in the wind,” a
phenomenon empty of any kind of divine or human significance whatsoever (Lk.
7:25-30).
(It is interesting to note in Mark that Jesus begins his own ministry
after he learns of John’s arrest by Herod. In other words, in the mind of
Christ, John has completed his ministry; it is time for him now to begin
his (Mk. 1:14).
John’s ministry, then, in its very setting, is a place
suggestive of that great change of which Mary sang: “He has shown his
strength with his arm, he has scattered the proud in the imaginations of
their hearts, he has put down the mighty from their thrones, and exalted
those of low degree; he has filled the hungry with good things, and the
rich he has sent away empty” (Lk. 1:51-53). It was a message that would
soon be heard from the mouth of the Messiah himself: “Woe unto you who are
rich now, for ye shall be poor…The first shall be last and the last
first.”
The Exodus
In addition to the covenant at Sinai, John, in calling the people out to
the desert, had probably one other great event in mind: the Prelude to
the Sinai event, the one great event that made everything possible, the
Exodus from Egypt.
All in all, Israel (or Joseph as she knew herself in those days) spent
four hundred long years in Egypt. Though she had entered Egypt freely and
found there a temporary home for herself from famine-ridden lands of
Palestine, the irony is that Egypt proved to be no home for the wandering
children of the desert, but a “House of Bondage” (Ex. 20:2). Through she
had entered Egypt of her own free will and at the invitation of the
Pharaoh, through the changing circumstances of time, Egypt became the
place where she lost her freedom and became an enslaved people.
As time went by the conditions of her servitude became harsher and harsher
until eventually the groans of her suffering, our Hebrew writer tells us,
reached the ears of God (Ex. 3:7).
It was at this moment of national suffering that God stretched out his
hand and liberated his people from the cruel conditions of slavery into
which they had fallen. Through the grace and mercy of God, Israel is able
to leave Egypt and flee to a place of freedom. Once freed from Egypt, she
binds herself in an act of gratitude to the service and covenant of her
God. (This Exodus experience provides the basis for one of the most
important insights in scripture: only in service to God is man able to
liberate himself from slavery to his own sinful nature and achieve his
true freedom as a child of God. In this respect, see Romans 7: 13-25
where Paul speaks of the un-liberated person as the one who is a slave to
sin.)
In the light of the Exodus experience, we can begin to see
a littler more of the implications of John’s message. It is as though he
is saying to the people: Israel is an enslaved people, and so in need,
once more, of another Exodus. The fact that Israel was at that time an
occupied land under the control of Rome would have given a double edge to
his message; that is, John, in effect, would be saying: Israel is in a
state, not only of political but also of spiritual bondage. This also
gives special relevance to the words of Zechariah who draws on the Exodus
experience (Lk. 1:73) when speaking about the significance of the John
and Jesus events for God’s people.
It is surely quite relevant to our discussion that John, a “son of the
manse,” (child of a temple priest) should have forsaken his religious
roots in Jerusalem, the seat of Rabbinic authority and Israel’s spiritual
centre, and made his way to the desert. His words to the Pharisees when
they arrived to hear him in the desert leave us with no doubts as what he
thought of the religious piety they represented (Matt. 3:7-10) and their
claim for what they regarded as their spiritual preference in the eyes of
God (vs. 9). There are strong echoes of Jesus’ own preaching in all of
this. This spiritual ‘bankruptcy” may have provided some of initial
motivation for “getting out” and seeking an authentic spirituality in the
rich religious associations of the desert. It may also have provided some
of the impetus for his spiritual reform movement, characterized as it was
by his emphasis on the need for repentance and spiritual cleansing.
In relation to the above, it actually appeared to be
quite common in Christian circles–in all probability, Christian Jewish
circles in particular—to draw a parallel between Israel’s condition of
slavery in Egypt and the slavery of the individual to the power of sin. In
a special irony, Paul (with Israel’s bondage in Egypt clearly in mind)
referred to the Jerusalem of his day as a city that was “in slavery with
her children” (Gal. 4:24). In other words, Jerusalem, the “city of God,”
was nothing more than an Egyptian “house of bondage.” Of course his
readers would understand that he was talking allegorically, not about
political, but spiritual bondage—although the political bondage to Rome
was probably more a concern to some people than anything else. They would
realize that Paul was thinking about things in a spiritual, and not a
political way. Christian thought had spiritually transformed Paul, and he
no longer had any interest in politically motivated Messianic idea of the
day. It was the Christian vision of the Kingdom of God that Paul was
interested in. In terms of Paul’s thought, Israel is in a dire state of
servitude, but not servitude to a political power in particular, but
servitude to a much stronger power, the power of sin (from which there is
never the possibility of flight or deliverance, except through Christ).
Those who have found their freedom in Christ are those who are enjoying
the blessing of spiritual emancipation and have their citizenship in the
“heavenly Jerusalem” (Gal. 4:26) the city built without hands. “You have
come to Mount Zion,” the writer to the Hebrews says,” and to the city of
the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem…to the assembly of the first-born
who are enrolled in heaven” (Heb. 21-23). Expressions such as these give
us some idea just how radically Christian thought had transformed the
religious, political and social notions of the day. They give meaning to
the words of Jesus: “My kingdom is not of this world” (Jhn. 18:36).
In choosing the wilderness, then, we can
say, John has made his Exodus from the city of political and spiritual
captivity and invited the children of “captive Jerusalem” to make their
escape and bind themselves to a new liberating covenant to the Lord their
God. He is doing what Ezekiel had done before him; that is, giving
dramatic import or emphasis to his message (Ez. 12:3-6, 11-14).
Elijah at Mt. Horeb
There is, however, yet one more significant event is
Israel’s past that may have provided an additional inspiration for John in
his choice of the desert. (We must always remember that the Israelites, as
a people, saw themselves as living out a historic relationship with God
that had its beginnings in a clearly remembered past. Her story was a
continuing story, related to God’s on-going plan for mankind. The major
events of the past were a part of her living history and constantly being
absorbed and reinterpreted into her present-day relationship with God. It
is, as we have pointed out, in terms of this living history that Luke
writes his story.
In a moment of personal and national crisis, Elijah, the prophet with whom
John was popularly identified by the people, had himself made a “forty
days and forty nights” pilgrimage to the sacred mountain of the covenant
(Mt. Horeb)—according to one tradition, that is. The trip was made at a
time when Queen Jezebel, Ahab’s foreign Moabite Queen, had used her
influence as Queen to introduce her foreign faith (the fertility cult of
Baal worship) into Israel and to stamp out the worship of Jehovah. In his
campaign of personal resistance against such measures, Elijah became
public enemy number one. After having his life personally threatened by
Jezebel, Elijah fled to the wilderness, and, while there, at the direction
of an angel, made his way to Mt. Horeb (1Kings 19:8) the mountain of the
covenant.
While at the mountain, Elijah took refuge in one of the
mountain caves (the symbolic place of re-birth). His place of refuge
reminds us of the “cleft of rock” in which Moses had sheltered himself
while the Lord in glory “passed by” (Ex. 33:18-34). And so it is with
Elijah. As he stands on the mountain before the Lord, in a manifestation
of earthquake and fire, the Lord “passes by.” However, it is not in the
earthquake or the fire that the Lord reveals himself to Elijah this time,
but in a “still small voice” (vs. 11-13).
It is a moment of divine revelation and re-affirmation for Elijah. God is
with him, and in his strength he can go forward.
While there appears to be no attempt on the part of the
Gospel writers to link John’s desert experience with the desert experience
of Elijah, it seems only but natural that we should do so. They are in
the land which for both has rich associations as the land of the covenant,
and is for both a place of spiritual renewal. Their journey into the
desert has the symbolic significance of reminding the people where their
loyalties lie and of the One to who they had betrothed themselves.
The Essence of John’s Message;
As to the actual nature of John’s message, we have already
noted that John preached a baptism of repentance (Lk. 3:3). This is
interpreted by our Gospel writers as a ministry of preparation. In other
words John is calling for spiritual reform and an openness on the part of
the people for what God was about to reveal to them. Once more, but in a
much more urgent sense, it was time to “break up the fallow ground,” a
time to make a one-hundred-and-eighty-degree turn toward God. Radical
reform of one’s life was required, for One is coming whose “winning fork
is in his hand, to clear his threshing floor, and to gather the wheat into
his granary, but the chaff he will burn with unquenchable fire” (Lk.
3:17).
The urgency of personal reform is especially seen in
John’s words to those who saw themselves as the spiritual elite, the
Pharisees, the perushim, the “separated ones,” the ones whose
practice it was to hold themselves aloof from the common herd in a “come
not thou near me, for I am more holy than thou” attitude.
John apparently shared much of the same antipathy toward
the Pharisees that Jesus himself expressed, and appears to have been
grounded in the same basic cause: religious hypocrisy. This can be
strongly inferred from John’s pointed words to the Pharisees that they
“bring forth fruits worthy of repentance.” Our Gospel writers tell us
that Jesus’ criticism of the temple authorities had to do with what he saw
as the glaring inconsistency between what they taught and what they did.
It was their hypocrisy that offended him, and all the sham and religious
humbug with which they surrounded themselves. Their responsibility before
God, Jesus affirmed, was to teach by example, not simply by precept. It
was sheer folly to believe that one could be “a guide to the blind” just
simply by being a teacher of the Law. When the teacher’s life belies his
precepts, the people are offered no enlightenment, but are being led into
darkness. It has become a matter of “the blind leading the blind.” If
anyone was a threat to the faith, the hypocrites were.
It was, as we say, apparently this same perceived
inconsistency between teaching and practice that lay behind John’s
extremely sharp words of criticism to the Pharisees when they joined his
audience in the wilderness. (He would notice their arrival by the white
robes with which they traditionally dressed.)Their hypocrisy was a form of
poison being injected into the blood stream of the people, he said
(calling them a “brood of vipers”) Bring your practice into line with your
profession, John says. Repent. Don’t say, and not do. That makes a fraud
out of everything. And if you are going to change, show me that you are
sincere. “Bring forth fruit worthy of repentance” (Matt. 3:8). Show your
sincerity by living out your faith.
Borrowing from the sermonic details of Jesus’ words to the Pharisees, we
can hear John telling the Pharisees that he wanted no sham, no humbug, no
saying one thing and doing another. No more standing at street corners and
making long prayers to be seen of the people; no more belittling of people
through a display of pretended and phony virtue, no more shunning of
people who needed their help and not their judgment, no more a saying of
one thing and a doing another. This all had to stop. Show God that you are
genuine by doing the genuine thing. In the language again of Jesus, we can
hear him saying to them: show compassion and mercy, not judgment, pray to
God in the privacy of your own heart, and, in doing good, never let your
left hand know what your right hand is doing; keep everything between
yourself and God. Get off the street corners and stop making a parade out
of yourselves. Do your praying in the privacy of your own home and perform
your good works anonymously.
Some have felt that John was overly severe in his criticisms, yet, on the
face of it, the prophets of the past had used a lot of strong language to
describe Israel’s weak and faltering efforts to serve God. Moses, the
greatest of the prophets, described Israel as a “stiff-necked” people,
bent on going their own ways and doing their own thing (in defiance of
God). Hosea used perhaps the strongest language of all, calling Israel a
“whore” because of her faithless ways. Israel, Hosea said, had forsaken
her marriage contract with God and run after new “lovers.” Strong
language indeed, but language that helps us to see “where John is coming
from” in the kind of attacks he levels against the members of his
audience. Like Isaiah and Ezekiel, he, too, speaks of the axe of judgment
that will fall on the useless vines.
Though John’s message, then, may appear to us to be very negative in tone,
with its heavy emphasis upon God’s fiery judgement, Luke tells us that
John actually preached a “gospel message” to the people, a message of
“good news” from God (Lk. 2:18). While John was sharp with what he saw as
flagrant hypocrisy his message to the people was, again in true prophetic
tone and quality, basically one of hope and promise. Those who put their
disobedient past behind them and return to God will find God’s mercy and
blessing. In a strictly Christian sense, this meant being open to God’s
word of judgment and grace in Jesus Christ.
The sharpness of John’s message, then, is in keeping with
the very nature of his ministry. He is the agent of change and wishes to
help the people prepare themselves to make the change that would be
necessary to welcome Christ into their midst. The past has to be put
behind and all that entailed, personally and institutionally. The people
have to open themselves up for God in a new and dramatic way; they have to
be open for God’s new future for them in Christ. (This, we will see, not
too many were able to do, especially those—the institutional
religionists—who had a personal stake in keeping the old way going.)
The ministry of John still has its relevance for us today.
His voice carries over the centuries and asks us important questions about
the fundamentals of our lives. He asks us where our basic loyalties lie:
questions about our commitment to God and to our beliefs; about the
sincerity of our faith and the representation we make of our faith; about
our willingness to open up our lives to the judgement of God and readiness
to throw ourselves upon the mercy and grace he offers to us in Jesus
Christ. A sincere and contrite response to these demands straightens out
the crooked places in our lives and lowers the barriers of resistance we
raise between ourselves and God. The right response to these questions
prepares a road of access for God into our lives. A faithful response to
the message he represents builds a personal bridge between our old selves
and the new self that can come into being through God’s grace in Jesus
Christ. “He that hath ears to hear, let him/her hear.”
Everything about John, then, who he is, what he is, where he conducts his
ministry points to his perceived mission as one who is to be an agent of
change; a catalyst of the new Kingdom, of God’s new covenant in Christ. He
will “turn the hearts of the father to the children, and the disobedient
to the wisdom of the just, to make ready a people for their God” (Lk.
1:17). He is a Samuel, making a clear break with the past, and introducing
to the world something that was wondrously and gloriously new. He is the
harbinger of a new kind of Kingdom and of One whose reign will be
everlasting, a kingdom without end (Lk. 1:32,33). His ministry is that one
important link that links the past to the present; the bridge from the old
to the new. With the advent of John, the Divine plan moves that one step
closer to its completion. His task finished, having introduced the world
to Christ, John fades from the human stage to give rightful place to the
One who follows (Jn. 3:30).
|