Keep sharing good news without ads.
No description available
All right, let's turn in our Bibles, please, to John chapter 1 as we continue our study of this gospel. I don't know how long we're going to be here. As I begin to study each week, I hope to get more done than what we do, but I'm really trying to make an effort to be more thorough in this than I am trying to move rapidly through this gospel.
So I suspect we're going to be here a while. And so today is the seventh Lord's Day that we've given to this study of the gospel of John. And last week we began to address this prelude to the public ministry of Jesus.
The prologue was in verses 1 through 18. The prelude is in verses 19 through 51 of John chapter 1. The outline that we've used is as follows. You had most of this in your notes from last week. Again, the prologue, verses 1 through 18, and then the prelude, the rest of chapter 1.
And this prelude to the public ministry may be broken down to the witness of John the Baptist and then the first disciples in verse 35 and following. And so last week we began to address John and the Jews.
We spent some time talking about the Jews as they are presented in the gospel of John. And particularly we addressed last week the challenge to John who he was. And he denied that he was the Messiah. He denied that he was Elijah.
He denied that he was the prophet. And today we want to address this next challenge to John. Why was John baptizing? That's what we want to address today in verses 24 through 28. And so down in your notes we have the scripture that we'll read.
John 1, 24 through 28. Now those who were sent were from the Pharisees. And they asked him saying, why then do you baptize if you're not the Christ, nor Elijah, nor the prophet? And John answered them saying, I baptize with water, but there stands one among you whom you do not know.
It is he who, coming after me, is preferred before me, whose sandal strap I am not worthy to lose. These things were done in Bethabara. Perhaps if you're reading in your newer translation, it'll say Bethany.
Bethany beyond Jordan where John was baptizing. So in verses 19 through 23 of John chapter 1, we read of the Jews challenging John to identify himself. And now in verses 24 through 28, we read of the challenge to John why he was baptizing.
We want to take each of these verses in turn and consider some of the implications of them as well. And so we read in verse 24, now those who were sent were from the Pharisees. We must first answer the question, who were the Pharisees?
Most of us are probably quite familiar with this group of Jewish men, since they are referenced numerous times in both the Gospels as well as the book of Acts. Paul himself, of course, was a Pharisee of Pharisees.
But perhaps because of our exposure to the biblical record of the Pharisees, we may have only a negative view of them. And that was not the view of the Jewish people generally in the first century. Josephus, who was a Jewish man who was born in AD 37, died in 100, wrote to the Pharisees.
He was a Jewish man who had quite an illustrious career, survived a horrendous onslaught, one of the few survivors out of dozens of Jews that were slaughtered. And he defected to Rome, and he became the personal historian to Titus, the Roman general, who would later lay siege to Jerusalem, capture the city, and destroy the temple in AD 70.
Well, Josephus wrote a very detailed history of his people Israel, which he recorded from the earliest days of the Garden of Eden all the way up until, well, even after the first century or toward the end of the first century when he died.
And in addition to not only what he recounted in our Old Testament record, he also gave a great deal of information about the so-called 400 silent years between our Old Testament, end of the Old Testament, and the beginning of the New Testament.
Much of the information we know about those 400 years in Palestine is due to Josephus and his history. This history of Josephus is called the Antiquity of the Jews, and then he also wrote a history of the warfare of the Jews, recording many details of the threat and destruction afflicted upon the Jews by the Syrians, particularly Antiochus Epiphanes, the Syrian general, in the second century BC.
And Josephus then gave his own eyewitness testimony of Jerusalem's overthrow by the Romans in the war of AD 67 and 70. He's there in Titus's camp, saw firsthand, and his testimony is just absolutely incredible.
The details of that horrendous siege and the defeat of the Jews. Well, Josephus mentioned the Pharisees in his history as having great influence among the Jewish people clear back in the second century BC.
They'd been around a while. In fact, they were functional and quite popular in the days of the Maccabees. And the days of the Hasmonean dynasty. Those were Jewish leaders of the Jewish people. The Maccabees were a Jewish family that had led their people in a revolt against Syria, winning their independence in 167 BC.
And Israel continued to exist independently until Rome conquered Judea and Palestine in 63 BC. And so this independent Israel existed for, you know, a hundred years.
Amazingly.
Josephus wrote of the Pharisees who exerted great influence within society. In fact, there was what they regarded as a corrupt leader, John Hyrcanus. He was regarded as the king of the Jews, but he also claimed and asserted himself to be a high priest.
And the Pharisees wanted no part of that. And so this is one of the earliest references, not the earliest, but one of the earliest references in Josephus to the Pharisees. He wrote, however, this prosperous state of affairs moved the Jews to envy Hyrcanus.
But they that were worst disposed to him were the Pharisees. Who were one of the sects of the Jews, as we informed you already. These have so great a power over the multitude that when they say anything against the king or against the high priest, they are presently believed.
That's how influential they were in Jewish society in the second century BC. Pharisees, of course, were experts in the Jews, the Mosaic law, the Holy Scriptures, but they were also experts in the tradition of the elders, the rabbis.
And they zealously promoted and tenaciously defended the traditions of the elders. So they really had two volumes of authority, the Hebrew Scriptures, our Old Testament, but also the traditions, the world tradition had been written down, codified.
One wrote of the Pharisees as they engaged the ministry of John the Baptist. So now we come into the first century. Some of the Pharisees were men of noble spirit, but all too often their multitudinous regulations led to an emphasis on the outward.
And this in turn to spiritual pride. This was accentuated by the fact that ordinary men did not have the time or the inclination to learn, let alone practice, the host of traditions which the Pharisees valued so highly.
On this occasion, their inquiry was the natural outcome of the position they had arrogated to themselves in the Jewish religion. A man was preaching and baptizing. He was drawing crowds in the name of religion.
The Pharisees must know all about it. And so we read of that in John chapter one. There were some among them of the Pharisees who basically asked John, why are you baptizing? If you're not, you know, if you're not Elijah, if you're not the prophet, if you're not the Messiah, what in the world you doing baptizing?
That's the tone that's being suggested. There was an antagonism here on their part. The Pharisees were regarded as the ministers among the people. They were very popular. They served largely in the synagogue scattered throughout the Roman Empire, but particularly in Palestine.
They were present in Jerusalem, but they were not predominant in the Jewish leadership of the Sanhedrin, the 70 that ruled over Judaism. Or among the priests of Jerusalem, the Pharisees were not primarily priests.
The Sadducees were. The Pharisees numbered perhaps in the tens and tens of thousands. The Sadducees were only a couple thousand, two thousand, somewhere around there in number. And most of the Sadducees lived in Jerusalem.
Most of the priests were Sadducees. The Pharisees and Sadducees did not get along. They didn't believe the same. They didn't believe the same scriptures. The Pharisees believed in all of the Hebrew scriptures, our Old Testament.
The Sadducees, no, only the first five books of Moses. The Pharisees advocated the tradition of the elders as authoritative. The Sadducees, no, no, only the five books of Moses. They were always in conflict with one another.
The Sadducees didn't believe in the bodily resurrection. The Pharisees did. The Sadducees didn't believe in angels. The Pharisees did. They were always in theological, doctrinal conflict. They eventually united with one another, of course, in their purpose to eliminate what they came to regard as a threat to them and their religious authority that Jesus of Nazareth seemed to pose.
And it would seem that here in John 1, we read of Pharisees in cooperation with Levites and priests. Again, they would have been mostly Sadducees. But here there are some of them that were of the Pharisees that came from Jerusalem.
They regarded John the Baptist and Jesus of Nazareth to be a threat to their power and the predominance of their beliefs among the Jewish people. And they were envious also because John was gathering so many favorable crowds.
And so how does the writer of the gospel portray the Pharisees? Well, one wrote, in the gospel of John, the Pharisees are the ever watchful and suspicious adversaries of Jesus. They keep the people under surveillance and influence them with their propaganda and are experts in religious matters.
That's how John, the gospel writer, the evangelist, represents the Pharisees to the readers. Now, the second question after describing the Pharisees, the second question we must answer is this. Who were these Pharisees in relation to the priests and Levites from Jerusalem, which were identified in verse 19?
We addressed those last week. Well, the New King James Version speaks of these two groups as though they were one embassy sent from Jerusalem, one group, and some of them were of the Pharisees. Verse 19 reads, now this is the testimony of John when the Jews sent priests and Levites from Jerusalem to ask him, who are you?
And then verse 24, now those who were sent were from the Pharisees. And they asked him, saying, why then do you baptize if you're not the Christ, not Elijah or the prophet? So the New King James Version suggests that they are the same group of people, that the priests and Levites were from the Pharisees.
Others, however, in other translations, assert that they were two completely different groups. There is the priests and the Levites, and then a second group were of the Pharisees. And then there is a third group that assert that some of the group were also the Pharisees.
And I think that's the right understanding. This suggests that after the priests and Levites, principally the Sadducees, had queried John the Baptist, the Pharisees, who were a part of that delegation, were not fully satisfied.
And so they stepped forward and they spoke up to question John directly, respecting his authority to baptize. And Leon Morris, who was a commentator of the middle 20th century, he wrote, I do not see the words point to two delegations, but they do seem to indicate that there were some Pharisees who were not content with the progress made by the official delegation and who accordingly added some questions of their own.
They were out to get him and they didn't think that, you know, the first group did its job. And so they would step in. We see in verse 25, they asked John why he baptized, basically challenging his authority for doing so.
They asked him, saying, why then do you baptize if you're not the Christ, nor Elijah, nor the prophet? Well, from this question, it's apparent that the Pharisees were part of that group, or at least they were there witnessing what the first group had said to John the Baptist.
They asked regarding, and it would seem challenged, John's legitimacy or authority for baptizing. If John was not one of the most notable persons expected to arrive prior to the appearance of the Messiah, why was he baptizing?
Now, I want to, at this point, stand back a little bit and speak about the ministry of John the Baptist and the Jewish response to it. This is an important matter, and I think it has relevance for us.
Baptism was not unknown to the Jewish people, although John's ministry was quite unique. In fact, some Jewish groups practiced baptism of Gentile proselytes to Judaism. If a Gentile wanted to be among the people of God, he had to become a Jew, a Jewish convert, a proselyte.
And so baptism was viewed as washing away the defilement that was acquired by Gentiles living among Gentiles. That's what they thought of Gentiles. You want to be part of us, you've got to be washed and cleansed of all the defilement that you've picked up through your life among them, and the fact you're a Gentile yourself.
And so they needed to be cleansed before admittance. And so it must have been rather galling to this embassy from the Jewish leadership of Jerusalem that John was baptizing Jews, teaching them that they were as unclean as Gentiles, and they must undergo repentance in order to have salvation that the Messiah would bestow upon them once he arrived.
So this was the point of contact and conflict, no doubt. Basically, he was telling these people who were Jews, Jewish authorities in Jerusalem were telling, we're the people of God, you're the people of God, you have salvation.
John was saying, you don't have salvation unless you repent. I'm reminded of back in the 90s when that ECT document was drafted, Evangelicals and Catholics together, it was a horrendous document. And what started that, and it was Roman Catholics and Evangelicals getting together and agreeing on certain things, what started that whole process was Roman Catholics down in South America were being evangelized by Evangelicals.
And they wanted to bring an end to that. So they got Evangelicals together, and one of the statements was to declare Roman Catholics Christians so they don't need to be evangelized. There was the same kind of attitude probably and concern that these Jewish leaders had in Jerusalem.
What are you doing evangelizing our people? They already have salvation, they're Jews. I remember D. James Kennedy at the time reacting and rejecting ECT. He said, you're asking me to believe a Roman Catholic's a Christian just because he's Roman Catholic?
He says, I'm a Presbyterian, I don't believe a man's a Christian just because he's a Presbyterian. And he's absolutely right. John's arrival at the Jordan River to baptize signaled that great events were about to take place.
It was John's mission to prepare the people for the arrival of the king. The very fact that John's ministry occurred in the wilderness far from Jerusalem was itself a subtle but clear repudiation of the Jewish establishment in Jerusalem.
If you want to know God, you're going to have to meet him in the wilderness where this prophet is speaking about him. John declared through his preaching that the time would soon arrive when God would visit his people with salvation through his anointed one, his king, the son of David.
And so he announced that the people were to prepare themselves for the king's arrival. For in bringing salvation, the Messiah must and will judge and remove that which defiles and destroys, that he will destroy from among the people.
All therefore who desire to experience God's salvation must separate themselves from sin. They must cleanse themselves from sin's defilement through repentance from sin as symbolized and confessed through baptism.
They must repent of sin or they would find themselves the objects of God's judgment rather than recipients of his salvation. And so John pressed upon the people individual responsibility and accountability before God to repent and be baptized.
That's very important, individual responsibility, individual accountability. And we read in Luke 3 of the substance of John's ministry. We're probably familiar with this but it's important that we understand it.
The 15th year of reign of Tiberius Caesar is when John, verse 3, went into all the region around Jordan preaching a baptism of repentance for the remission of sins. As it's written in the book of the words of Isaiah the prophet, the voice of one crying in the wilderness.
We addressed that last week, we won't do so now. Verse 7, then he said to the multitudes that came out to be baptized by him, brood of vipers, who warned you to flee from the wrath to come? Therefore bear fruits worthy of repentance and do not begin to say to yourselves, we have Abraham as our father.
For I say to you that God is able to raise up children to Abraham from these stones. And now look again, the individual responsibility. Even now the ax is laid to the root of the trees, therefore every tree, every tree which does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire.
So the people asked him saying, what should we do then? And he gives direct specific instruction to different categories of people, tax collectors, soldiers, others. And so the people were in expectation, he prepared the people.
And then he declared of course, the Messiah would come, I indeed baptize you with water, one coming after me is mightier than I. Whose sandal strap I'm not worthy to loose. He'll baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire.
His winnowing hand is in his hand. In other words, he's going to separate the wheat from the chaff.
Judgment.
He'll thoroughly clean out his threshing floor, gather the wheat into his barn, but the chaff he'll burn with unquenchable fire. Now that will take place also on the final judgment day, but it took place during our Lord's earthly ministry.
And it was fully manifest in AD 70. The Lord Jesus came in and separated his disciples from all others. The wheat from the chaff. Now we may declare several important aspects of John's ministry. First again, and let me underscore this.
John called for individual responsibility to repent of sin and submit to baptism with view to forgiveness of sins. And so although John principally preached to Jewish people, he made it clear that being Jewish was not sufficient to gain entrance into the promised kingdom.
It did not matter who your father was. Abraham could be your father. That does not in any way qualify you to enter the kingdom. It didn't matter if you were Jewish. Every individual was responsible and accountable for his own actions.
And secondly, entrance into the blessing of the kingdom would only occur if God forgave the sins of that one who enters. John made it clear God would not grant forgiveness of sins unless repentance of sin was evident in one's life and that repentant one submitted to baptism.
Every person who was sinful must repent of his sin with view to the arrival of the promised Savior, King. And so even if it could be demonstrated that Abraham was his biological father ancestor, he was not qualified to be baptized until he had confessed and demonstrated his repentance from sin.
Herein lies the difference and distinction from the Old Testament, the Old Testament covenant community of Israel. And what John the Baptist held forth before the people before whom he ministered the word of God.
To become a citizen of Israel prior to John, physical descent from Abraham and physical circumcision was required.
No more.
To become a citizen in the restored Israel under the Messiah's reign, one's physical parentage brought no benefit, assured no entrance, assured no participation among the people of God and the kingdom.
And later the evangelist of the fourth gospel will recount the Lord Jesus telling Nicodemus, his natural birth counted for nothing. You got to be born a second time. You got to be born from above to even see, let alone enter the kingdom of God.
Natural birth. It doesn't matter who your parents are. I believe this principle, by the way, just negates paedo-baptism. And I say that with respect to my many friends who were reformed paedo-baptists.
It doesn't matter who your dad is or who your mother is. That doesn't qualify you to be baptized. Every individual must repent of sin. And then you're qualified, admitted to baptism. And so thirdly, repentance from sin had to have been demonstrated through confession, an amendment of life, or John would not baptize that one that came to him.
Many came to John to be baptized, but he refused to baptize them. We read in Luke 3, 7. No, that won't cut it. And thrown in the fire. And here, good fruit is a manifesting repentance from sin. And being baptized with view to the coming kingdom of God, which was at hand.
Fourthly, submission to John's baptism was required of all who would obey his preaching, John's preaching. Baptism was with view to forgiveness of sins and entry into the kingdom of God. It was not the basis of entrance or even the means of entrance.
But it was the door to the kingdom. If you didn't submit to John's baptism, you had no hope. Now, this, of course, didn't in any way literally wash away their sins, but it was an act of faith and obedience that they were baptized, wasn't it?
In view of the coming Messiah. Now, realize John was not claiming a different way of salvation than what Peter and others proclaimed after the death and resurrection of Jesus. There was a difference, yes, of course.
John was directing people to look forward to the soon arrival of Messiah in the kingdom. They were to believe John's preaching of what was at hand. The people were to exhibit faith in the truth that he proclaimed by doing what God had commanded them to do, repent and be baptized.
And our Lord Jesus came to John to be baptized of him. And you recall John's initial reluctance and resistance to do so. Jesus came from Galilee to John at the Jordan to be baptized by him. And John tried to prevent him, saying, I need to be baptized by you.
You're coming to me. But then the response of the Lord Jesus. Jesus' answer said to him, permit it to be so now. For thus it is fitting for us to fulfill all righteousness. It's absolutely necessary, Jesus said, for you and I, us, to obey God's commands.
God commands that all of his people be baptized with view to the kingdom. I'm going to be baptized by you, John. If Jesus was compelled to be baptized by John in order to obey his father, to fulfill all righteousness, should not everyone be so willing to be baptized to profess their faith in Jesus Christ?
I think that's a legitimate application. And yet, why is it that so many view baptism as perhaps a preferable, but really a non-essential matter? I know the argument. We're saved by grace through faith, not of ourselves, not of works, lest any man should boast.
But they draw a wrong conclusion from that, saying it doesn't matter, therefore, what you do or what you don't do, as long as you believe on Jesus, you have salvation. So it really doesn't matter whether or not I'm baptized.
That is a dangerous opinion. It's wrong and very deadly to the soul. See how well that reasoning stands scrutiny and examination by the Lord Jesus when he summons you on the day of judgment. Some people argue, well, the thief on the cross wasn't baptized, he was saved.
Yes, thank the Lord. He was saved and was granted by God's grace free access into the kingdom of God that very day by King Jesus. But do not conclude from that passage that we can set aside the commandment of God and still have salvation.
It's necessary for us to fulfill all righteousness. We are to do what God's will commands us to do in his word. That's what Christians do. Remember what the Lord Jesus said. Therefore, whoever confesses me before men, him, I will also confess before my father who is in heaven.
But whoever denies me before men, him, I will also deny before my father who is in heaven. The primary way a Christian confesses his faith is in his or her baptism. To refuse to be baptized is a denial of Christ, is it not?
I would say it is. Charles Spurgeon wrote a classic book entitled The Soul Winner. In the first chapter, what is it to win a soul? When I arrived here 20 years ago next month, I made a copy of this and gave it to all the leaders of our church.
What is it to win a soul? In one of the paragraphs, or one of the little portions of this book in this chapter, Spurgeon wrote this about our converts. There must also be a willingness to obey the Lord in all his commandments.
It is a shameful thing for a man to profess discipleship and yet refuse to learn his Lord's will upon certain points, or even dare to decline obedience when that will is known. How can a man be a disciple of Christ when he openly lives in disobedience to him?
And by disciple, he means a Christian. If the professed convert distinctly and deliberately declares that he knows his Lord's will but does not mean to attend to it, you're not to pamper his presumption, it's your duty to assure him he's not saved.
That's the direct approach. Has not the Lord said, he that takes up not his cross and comes after me cannot be my disciple? And then he qualifies it, mistakes as to what the Lord's will are to be tenderly corrected, but anything like willful disobedience is fatal.
To tolerate it would be treason to him that sent us. Jesus must be received as king as well as priest. And where there is any hesitancy about this, the foundation of godliness is not yet laid. Faith must obey her maker's will, this was a hymn that Spurgeon quoted, as well as trust his grace, a pardoning God is jealous still for his own holiness.
Now as we already said, John the Baptist was not proclaiming a different way of salvation than what Peter and others proclaimed after the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. John had a different perspective in that he directed his hearers to look forward to the coming Messiah and what he would do on the day of Pentecost.
Peter directed his hearers to respond after looking to what Jesus did, had done, suffered, died, and be raised, and who Jesus currently was, the enthroned Lord and Christ. And so we read Peter's words on the day of Pentecost, upon his hearers reacting and responding to his message.
Now when they heard this, they were cut to the heart, said to Peter and the rest of the apostles, men and brethren, what shall we do? Peter said, repent, let every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit for the promises to you and to your children, and to all who are far off, as many as the Lord God will call.
So Peter was not setting forth the instrument of justification in this instruction. We're not justified by baptism, obviously. We're justified through faith alone. But Peter was commanding his hearers to take action, just as John the Baptist had done.
Essentially, Peter declared, if you desire to be saved from your sin, then repent of your sin and be baptized, and then be numbered among the people of God, King Jesus will give you the gift of the Holy Spirit to enable you to do his will.
Now, what part of that can a person ignore or disregard and hope to receive the benefits of salvation that Peter declared is bestowed upon those who believe and obey his words? This is what Christians do.
They obey the Lord. They believe. They repent. They amend their thinking in ways. They submit to baptism. They are all compelled to fulfill all righteousness. Just as the Lord himself said, it's incumbent upon us to fulfill all righteousness and to fail or refuse to obey is deadly and damnable.
Our Lord Jesus once asked some, why do you call me Lord? Lord, do not the things that I say. The Lord has commanded you go and make disciples, baptizing them in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit.
This is what Christians do. I might say a few quick words, however, relating John's baptism and Christian baptism, because there are differences. First, clearly there are differences. No person baptized by John, nor even John the Baptist himself, had an understanding of baptism symbolizing the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ.
It was a baptism of repentance. And yet today we wouldn't baptize anybody who did not understand baptism as a portrayal of the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ. There was a progression, wasn't there?
An understanding of the nature of baptism from John to post-resurrection baptism. Another baptism was infused with new and fuller meaning upon the suffering and death and resurrection of Christ. What about the role of repentance?
Top of page eight. The essence of John's preaching was repentance from sin in preparation for the coming of the king. Only repentant ones would receive the salvation that would come through him. And so John's preaching had a forward look in anticipation of the forgiveness of sins that Messiah would bring.
Repentance is still an essential part of our gospel message. And perhaps one of the greatest errors in evangelicalism today, I sat and heard an appeal for people to embrace Jesus as Savior last week without a word of repentance mentioned.
And it concerned me greatly. That's not the gospel. Repentance, turning from sin, turning to Christ, is a part of our gospel preaching. William Booth, the founder of the Salvation Army in the 1800s, said the greatest danger to Christianity is to promise forgiveness of sins where there's no repentance.
And yet that's often how salvation is presented today. All you have to do is believe on Jesus and what he did. You don't have to do anything. In fact, you shouldn't even think about doing anything. The Bible tells you if you believe on Jesus, you turn from your sins and you submit to Jesus as your Lord and your Savior.
And there's no salvation if that is not done. What about the expression of baptism or repentance for the remission of sins? Peter declared the same thing on the day of Pentecost. Again, he's not presenting the means of forgiveness of sins here, which is faith in Christ alone.
He's describing the nature of faith. Faith is obedient to the scriptures. Faith is obedient to the commands of God. And the Bible commands believers in Jesus Christ to be baptized. And again, repentance is necessary and a prerequisite to biblical baptism.
Well, let's quickly return to John chapter 1, verse 26. John's answer directed their attention to the Messiah for whom he was preparing the way. And so upon these ones of the Pharisees asking John, why then do you baptize if you're not the Christ or Elijah the prophet?
Verse 26, John answered them saying, I baptize with water. But there stands one among you whom you do not know. Let's draw attention to the tense of the Greek words here. You know, we don't see necessarily reflected in our English translation.
When John declared, I baptize, he expressed it in the present tense. I'm baptizing. Yes, I'm baptizing in water. Why are you baptized? Yes, I'm baptizing in water. But then the next verb, which describes this one standing, is actually a perfect tense verb.
Even though in the English it's translated as present. They're one who stands. Actually, it's a perfect tense verb. And in Greek, what that generally commonly conveys is that he began to stand in your presence in the past.
And he's still standing right now in front of you. And they were oblivious to it. You know, I'm not. We don't have time to go into great detail about this. But really, what John was declaring is that this Jesus has been standing in your midst and you haven't known him.
See, I believe that John here was talking to this embassy after Jesus had returned from the 40 days of wilderness temptation. There's no account here in John's gospel of Jesus being baptized. John is testifying of what happened 40 days before.
He saw the spirit descend upon Jesus and confessed he's the Lamb of God that takes away the sin of the world. And now John is declaring to these Jewish people, there's one who's standing among you. He has been standing.
He is standing among you. And you know him not. You're giving attention to me. I'm baptizing. And you don't know that the one I'm pointing to is standing right here. And you don't know him. The point that John was doing was drawing attention again from himself to the Lord Jesus Christ.
John was a witness to Christ. And that's what he was always doing. There's one who stands among you whom you do not know. I love what Matthew Henry wrote. This is in the middle of page 9, that long block quote.
Note the great business of Christ's ministers is to direct all people to him. We preach not ourselves but Christ Jesus the Lord. John gave the same account to this committee that he'd given to the people.
Verse 15. This is he of whom I spoke. John was confident and uniform in his testimony, not as a reed shaken with the wind. The Sanhedrin were jealous of his interest in the people. But he is not afraid to tell them that there is one at the door that will go beyond him.
First he tells them of Christ's presence among them now at this time. There stands one among you at this time whom you know not. Christ stood among the common people and was one of them. Note one. Much truth, worth, much true worth lies hidden in the world.
Obscurity is often the lot of real excellency. It's there. We just don't see it. Saints are God's hidden ones. Therefore the world knows them not. And secondly, God himself is often nearer to us than we are aware of.
And then he quotes, what was Jacob? Wasn't it in Genesis? The Lord is in this place and I knew it not. They were gazing in expectation of the Messiah. Lo, he is here or he is there when the kingdom of God was abroad and already among them.
And secondly, he tells them of Christ's preference above himself. He comes after me, yet he is preferred before me. This he had said before, he adds here, whose shoe latchet I'm not ready to loose. I'm not fit to be named the same day with him.
It's an honor too great for me to pretend to be the meanest or simplest office about him. When John declared, by the way, that he was not worthy to reach down and loosen the straps on Jesus' sandals, he was setting himself as low as you could possibly go in Jewish society.
There were teachers in those days and they had disciples, and the disciples were supposed to serve the teacher in every respect. Whatever the teacher wanted, whatever the teacher needed, the disciple of that teacher was to do it without question.
One exception is the teacher should never expect, nor should the disciple ever have to get down and loosen the sandals of the feet of that teacher. That's so demeaning, so lowly, that that disciple shouldn't be expected or required to do that.
The rabbis talked about that, and yet John says, I'm not even worthy to do that. Clearly, John was setting forth the Lord Jesus in his glory, trying to present the Lord Jesus before them, even as he was trying to diminish his own relevance and importance.
I'm just a voice, and you're talking to me about baptizing. Yeah, I'm baptizing, but there's one standing here you don't have a clue about, you don't know about, even though I've been trying to proclaim him and present him to you.
Crass ignorance on the part of these Jewish leaders. And so John set forth the greatness of this one, even while he diminished his own importance. Verse 27, John said, it's he who's coming, he who coming after me is preferred before me, whose sandal strap I'm not worthy to loose.
Here again, John described him, we saw it earlier in verse 15, John bore witness to the pre-incarnate Christ, and he does so here again. He's preferred before me. And so John always set himself lower when he spoke of the one coming after him.
One wrote of this, Jesus is incomparably greater than John, and John as a good witness makes it known. John's role is logically prior, though only on the plane of historic temporality, and he was a preparatory witness to prepare the way for Jesus.
John explains this emphatically by defining himself as not worthy enough to perform probably the most demeaning task assigned to household servants, caring for the feet of one's master. Some ancient sources even considered the task too demeaning for servants to have to perform for their masters, for to do such a work was to be a slave.
And thus, although ancient teachers in Judaism usually expected disciples to function as servants, later rabbis allowed one caveat, one exception, unlike slaves, they did not tend to the teacher's sandals.
And the Baptist argument reversed the normal social norm in order to magnify the greatness of Christ. The sum of it is that he wants to abase himself as much as he can, lest any degree of honor wrongly given to him should obscure the superiority of Christ.
His relation is to the ministry of Christ. He is a prophet who prepares the way for the prophet. Any relation to his person can only be described in terms of a slave. John was a witness and a faithful man.
And then it concludes placing the matter geographically. These things were done in Bethabara beyond the Jordan where John was yet baptizing. And we already commented, probably it was Bethany beyond Jordan.
It may have been changed by a well-known commentator origin in the 4th century A .D., I believe. But originally it was probably Bethany. It's described as Bethany beyond Jordan to distinguish it, and so they wouldn't confuse it with the Bethany, which was just a short distance from Jerusalem, the hometown of Martha, Mary, and Lazarus.
And it took place here in Bethabara beyond Jordan, or better, Bethany beyond Jordan. Matthew Henry commented on this. Bethabara signifies the house of passage. Some think it was the very place where Israel passed over Jordan into the land of promise under the conduct of Joshua.
It was opened the way into the gospel state by Jesus Christ. It was a great distance from Jerusalem beyond Jordan, probably because what he did there would be least offensive to the government. Amos must go prophesy in the country, not near the court.
But it was sad that Jerusalem should put so far from her the things that belonged to her peace. He made this confession in the same place where he was baptizing, that all those who attended his baptism might be witnesses of it, and none might say that they knew not what to make of him.
Even his distance from Jerusalem was drawing attention to the Christ. J .C. Ryle of the 19th century wrote of the ignorance of these Jewish leaders who failed to see Jesus even though he was standing in their midst.
And I gave this quote because J .C. Ryle makes an application to the people of his day. He was a bishop in the Church of England. Everybody attended church. But he was concerned that they did not see the one standing among them as well.
These Jews professed to be waiting for the appearance of the Messiah. Like all the Pharisees, they prided themselves on being children of Abraham, possessors of the covenants. They rested in the law, made their boast of God.
They professed to know God's will, to believe God's promises. They were confident that they themselves were guides of the blind, lights of them that sat in darkness. And yet at this very moment their souls were utterly in the dark.
They were 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 would never know him. The words of John the Baptist are prophetic description of the state of things which lasted 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, in 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, and peace have an eternal lifer, so nigh that they might touch them, yet they sleep. Christ stands 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.
And they are true, aren't they? May the Lord not allow any of us to fail to see the Lord Jesus standing in our midst. Some have done so. The Apostle Paul was alarmed at the Galatians, who turned from Christ so quickly, and he described them before whose eyes Jesus Christ is clearly portrayed.
Paul was saying, he's standing before you, and you haven't seen him. May that not ever be said of us. But may we always be mindful of the presence of the Lord Jesus among us. May we see him for who he is with spiritual eyes, spiritual perception, spiritual faith, spiritual dedication and resolve to do everything he commands us to do, because that's what a Christian does.
He's a disciple of Jesus Christ, a follower of Jesus Christ, an obedient follower of Jesus Christ. May the Lord enable each of us to step forward and confess him. And if you're a Christian, it's your responsibility to confess him in baptism.
That's what God calls you to do first. You're a Christian, what is the first thing you're to do? Be baptized to confess Christ. Baptized in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. You come and talk to us, and we'll help you with this.
Lord willing, let's pray. Thank you, Father, for your word. Thank you, Lord, for faithful servants of Christ as John the Baptist, who set such a high standard, but a noble example for us. Help us, our Lord, to be faithful to you in this day, Lord, before others about us and before the world in which you've placed us.
Give us, our Lord, grace that we would be obedient to you in every aspect. Convict us, Lord, of those aspects of our lives that are in disobedience, and give us a fresh spirit of repentance that we might turn from sin and obey you in obedience, Lord, as a demonstration in manifesting our true faith in Jesus Christ, in whose name we pray, amen.
