L. John the Baptist’s questions (7:18–35)
L. John the Baptist’s questions (7:18–35)
1. The questions asked and answered (7:18–23)
John the Baptist was in prison. Evidently he was expecting Jesus to do something spectacular. When nothing seemed to happen he sent men to Jesus to find out why and possibly to provoke some action.
18–20. What Jesus had been doing was known widely in the countryside and word was taken to John in prison (3:20). So he summoned two disciples and sent them to ask Jesus, Are you he who is to come, or shall we look for another? He who is to come (cf. 3:16; 13:35; 19:38; Heb. 10:37) was not an accepted Messianic designation, but clearly John is using it in this sense (cf. Marshall, ‘a vague messianic expectation’). But as he had long since borne witness to Jesus as the Mighty One who would come (3:16), it is not clear why he should ask this question (though we should remember that in this Gospel John does not specifically say that Jesus was that One). Perhaps the least likely solution is that which suggests that John himself had no qualms but his followers did. So he sent his disciples with a message, knowing that Jesus would give a satisfactory answer. This is too artificial to carry conviction. There seems likewise little to be said for the view that the questions mark a dawning faith in John. Up till this time, it is suggested, John had continued his own movement in opposition to Jesus, but now he began to wonder whether Jesus was the Great One he knew would come and whether he should accordingly abandon his own movement. Against this is the fact that John was in prison. He was certainly at this time not promoting any rival group. There is also the fact that our sources show that John did point people to Jesus (Matt. 3:13f.; John 1:29ff., 35f.; 10:41; Acts 18:25; 19:4). Others think that John’s faith in Jesus had failed a little. Confinement in Herod’s prison was no picnic and, with the uncertainty as to whether he would ever be released, even this stout-hearted man may have quailed. The objection to this is the character of the man. The explanation remains possible, but it scarcely fits in with what we know of John. A fourth suggestion is that it was not John’s faith but his patience that failed. His questions may be in the spirit of, ‘You are the One we are expecting, aren’t You? Then why not do something?’ This must remain as a possibility, but perhaps it is more likely that John was just plain puzzled. He had prophesied that the Coming One would do some striking works of judgment (3:16f.). But Jesus was doing nothing of the sort. He was engrossed in works of mercy. Would somebody else then do those works of judgment? John wanted to know.
21–23. Jesus’ answer is to direct attention to what was going on. Help was being given to the blind (Isa. 35:5), the lame (Isa. 35:6), lepers, the deaf (Isa. 35:5), the dead and the poor (Isa. 61:1). The Old Testament parallels show that the healing miracles and the preaching to the poor have Messianic significance. They are the divine accreditation of Jesus’ mission. It was in such works of mercy and not in spectacular victories over Roman armies that Messiah’s work would be accomplished (‘Jesus might not represent the kind of God they wanted, but the question is posed whether here might not be the kind of God they needed’, Richardson, p. 20). Jesus had preached about this in the synagogue at Nazareth (4:18ff.). But this truth is not open to everyone’s perception. So Jesus pronounces a blessing on him who takes no offence at me. The verb rendered takes offence is picturesque. It derives from the trapping of birds, and refers to the action that depresses the bait-stick and so triggers off the trap. It is a colourful way of referring to the cause of trouble.
2. The greatness of John (7:24–30)
Those who heard Jesus answer John’s messengers may have thought that he was rebuking or even repudiating John. He removes any such impression by making it clear that John was the greatest of men.
24. After the messengers left, Jesus addressed some questions to the onlookers, and made them face up to what John was and stood for. His first question was, What did you go out into the wilderness to behold? Crowds had flocked to hear John’s preaching. Why? Jesus suggests an answer, A reed shaken by the wind? This may be a proverbial reference to the commonplace, what might be seen anywhere. More likely Jesus is saying that John was no reed, easily swayed. The incongruity of this as a description of that stern man of the deserts is evident.
25. Jesus’ second question was, A man clothed in soft clothing? Again there are two ways of taking it. Did they expect to find a courtier in the wilderness? Or is Jesus asking, ‘Was John a courtier?’ The word soft (malakos) means ‘soft to the touch’, but it acquires the secondary meaning, ‘effeminate’. This clearly does not fit John. Jesus goes on to say that those who are gorgeously apparelled and live in luxury are to be found, not in John’s wilderness, but in kings’ courts. The very fact that John lived a hard life on the simplest of fare in the roughest of places ruled out all such suggestions.
26–27. The third question was, A prophet? This time the answer is right, for John was a prophet and more. The addition of the quotation from Malachi 3:1 shows that to John was given the honour of being the forerunner of the Messiah. Manson reminds us that this not only points to the greatness of John, but ‘presupposes on Jesus’ part … a consciousness of the finality of his own mission to Israel’.
28. Jesus goes on to accord to John the highest place possible: among those born of women none is greater than John. Jesus was not downgrading John. He put him in the highest place he could. John’s office set him apart from all other men.
But Jesus did not stop there. He who is least in the kingdom of God is greater than he. Jesus’ coming marked a watershed. He came to inaugurate the kingdom. And the least in that kingdom is greater than the greatest of men. This is a statement of historical fact. John belonged to the time of promise. The least in the kingdom is greater, not because of any personal qualities he may have, but because he belongs to the time of fulfilment. Jesus is not minimizing the importance of John. He is putting membership of the kingdom into its proper perspective. ‘There is something more important than following John: entry to the kingdom’ (Marshall).
29. It is often held that verses 29–30 are a parenthesis inserted at this point by Luke. But such an insertion into a speech of Jesus is quite without parallel. The uncertainty arises because in the Greek there is no object for the verb rendered heard. RSV supplies this, which demands that the section be a parenthesis. But we could instead supply ‘him’ (Goodspeed) or ‘John’ (Phillips). Taken this way, Jesus follows a reference to John’s greatness with one to the reactions to his preaching. This seems preferable (cf. JB; Hendriksen). All the people seems inclusive enough to take care of the tax collectors. But the tax men were so hated and ostracized that they formed a race apart (see on 5:27), so they are emphasized (cf. Goodspeed, ‘even the taxcollectors’). But these common people justified God, i.e. they ‘pronounced God just’, they accepted the ways of God as they were and did not try to constrain him into a mould of their own manufacture. This is seen in that they were baptized with the baptism of John, a baptism that was with a view to repentance, and which pointed people forward to the work that Jesus would do.
30. Over against the penitent little people Jesus sets the Pharisees and the lawyers. The lawyers were men who gave themselves over to the study of the law of God. They were very good at understanding the minutiae of the law without ever coming to grips with its essential message. They were concerned with the law of God but not with the will of God. So they and the Pharisees rejected the purpose of God for themselves. Where simpler people had heard and responded to God’s call to repent, these men in their complacency and smug selfsatisfaction found nothing to repent of. They rejected God’s way. They refused John’s baptism. They put themselves outside the way of blessing and would not give Jesus an open hearing when he came. The closed mind leads to mistake on mistake.
3. The reaction of the hearers (7:31–35)
Jesus proceeds to bring out the unreasonableness of the people of his day by pointing to their rejection of both John the Baptist and himself, but for precisely opposite reasons. There was no way of pleasing them.
31–32. Jesus asks a rhetorical question about what the men of this generation are like and answers in terms of children at play. He quotes a little couplet which children apparently used when other children would not join their games. When they piped cheerily their playmates refused to dance, but when they went to the opposite extreme and wailed their friends would not cooperate in that either. They would be neither cheerful nor glum. It is not quite clear whether the men of this generation are being likened to the children who piped and wailed or to those who refused to dance or weep. In the first case the thought is that they complained that John the Baptist would not be merry, but changed their tune when Jesus came, blaming him for not being gloomy. In the second case they responded neither to Jesus’ cheerfulness nor to John’s solemnity. Perhaps there is slightly more to be said for the latter, but either way the point is much the same. They would accept neither Jesus nor John.
33. Jesus brings this out with reference to John. He was an ascetic. He ate no bread (his food was ‘locusts and wild honey’, Mark 1:6) and drank no wine (presumably he drank water). But, although this spartan approach to living was characteristic of holy men in many religions, it did not endear John to his fellows. His teaching was too uncomfortable. So they wrote him off with the verdict, He has a demon.
34. Jesus did not follow John’s ascetic line. He ate and drank as ordinary people did. People who rejected John for departing from the general rule ought to have accepted Jesus. But not a bit of it. They called him a glutton and a drunkard, and for good measure complained about his dining companions. He was a friend of tax collectors and sinners. Religious people shunned such low company, but Jesus despaired of no-one. To win sinners for God he freely associated with them. And yet people complained. After their attitude to John this was sheer perversity. There was no reason in it.
35. But wise people will not be put off. Wisdom is justified by all her children. The verb justified means ‘declared just’ or ‘shown to be just’ or ‘accepted as just’. Those who are really wise (the children of wisdom) will pronounce right the right way, whether it be ascetic or social. They will see the wisdom of God in both John and Jesus. They will not walk in the critical ways of those who can never be pleased.