ness and the Jordan,― publicans, people of either sex who had been guilty of gross offences, notorious sinners smitten by the church's ban and the contempt of all right-minded citizens. It was doubtless because their sense of guilt was more easily roused and their consciences accused them more loudly than was the case with others; and also because the prophet, instead of rejecting them with horror, saw no such great difference between them and the ordinary Israelites, but considered all Israel as in truth unclean. It was with these outcast classes that John had most success. With them the working of the new influence was obvious, their repentance was practical, the impression they received permanent, their faith genuine.'

3

In general, however, the result of the prophet's preaching and baptizing was certainly not equal to the expectations which might fairly have been formed by others, and with which he himself had begun his work. The leaders of the nation maintained an impartial or rather an indifferent attitude towards him to the last. As long as he caused no disturbance they left him to pursue his way; but as for going to him themselves, the high-born priests and magistrates never dreamed of such a thing! They turned in contempt from a prophet to whose followers the very refuse of the people belonged. The Pharisees might have shown more interest in his work if only he would have paid them the attention they conceived to be their due; but such courteous advances were hardly to be expected from him, and the Pharisees on their side had not penetration enough to understand and appreciate him, and so take the initiative themselves. Inasmuch as he announced the near approach of the kingdom of God, for which they too passionately longed, they did pay some attention to him; but their superstitious reverence for antiquity and their slavish worship of the letter effectually prevented their recognizing in him a prophet of the true and ancient stamp. Their national pride might well be hurt by the small esteem in which he seemed to hold the privilege of descent from Abraham. Their narrowness and self-satisfaction may have caused many of them to regard as a fanatical extravagance the strictness and severity of a piety which, though somewhat similar to their own, went so much further. And the result was that many of them, when they saw what a consuming fire burned in him, shrugged their shoulders and

1 Matthew xxi. 32.
Matthew xxi. 32.

4

2 Mark xi. 33 (Matthew xxi. 27; Luke xx. 7). 4 Matthew ix. 14 (Mark ii. 18; Luke v. 33).

4

3

cried, "The fellow must be mad."1 But the great masses bowed before his mighty spirit, went to the wilderness in crowds, desired to be admitted to his baptism, believed for the most part that he was a true prophet, and even accepted his announcement of the Messianic age in such complete good faith that, when he had changed the wilderness for the district beyond Jordan, the movement began to assume dangerous proportions in the eyes of Herod. Even after his imprisonment they did not forget him; and when he had been beheaded, and the royal murderer suffered a defeat in battle some time afterwards, the disaster was regarded by the people as the penalty exacted by a righteous God for the blood of John the Baptist. But in spite of all this the multitude was too shallow to retain a lasting impression of his preaching, and soon fell into the old groove again.

5

But among those he baptized there were some who would not leave him again; and he gradually found himself surrounded by a band of faithful and zealous disciples, who regulated their lives in accordance with his precepts. He ordered them to fast often and strictly; to show their repentance, and to do penance not only for themselves but for all Israel, including the unconverted. He taught them long prayers to be repeated daily for the speedy coming of the Messianic kingdom. There was nothing original in these commandments themselves; and, indeed, by laying such stress on outward forms of religion he showed how thoroughly he was still imbued with the Jewish spirit, since the Pharisees also enforced the same observances upon their followers.o But the meaning of it all was very different in the two cases. With the Pharisees such actions were considered so meritorious as to afford a just ground of satisfaction to those who performed them; with John they were simply acts of selfhumiliation to propitiate the Lord before the day of judgment, attempts to appease Him that the dawn of the golden age might be hastened. In a word his whole system turned upon the approach of the kingdom of God.

In dealing with the person of John we are on thoroughly historical ground. Not only does Josephus 10 mention his

1 Matthew xi. 18 (Luke vii. 33).

3 Luke vii. 29.

5 Flavius Josephus.

7 Luke xi. 1.

2 Matthew xi. 7 (Luke vii. 24).

4 Matthew xxi. 26 (Mark xi. 32: Luke xx. 6)

6 Matthew ix. 14 (Mark ii. 18; Luke v. 33). 8 Matthew xi. 11.

9 Matthew ix. 14 (Mark ii. 18; Luke v. 33), as above. Also Matthew vi. 5 16; Luke xviii. 11, 12.

10 Jewish Antiquities, book xviii. chap. v. sec. 2.

name, his work, the influence he exercised, and his death, but the incidental notices scattered up and down throughout the first three Gospels bear from their very nature the clear stamp of truth. These casual, and as it were unintentional, allusions fill in and correct the passages referred to at the head of this chapter, in which the Gospels expressly describe the man and his preaching. There is, however, one point to which we have not yet referred, and as to which we must expressly caution our readers, as they will otherwise fall into & serious mistake concerning John the Baptist.

The point in question is this: John is represented as having proclaimed himself the precursor of Jesus, or rather of the Messiah. Luke even adds that the people were in doubt whether he himself was not the Christ, and that he took occasion thereby to promise that the Christ should come, and to distinguish himself from him as his predecessor.1 "After me comes one who is mightier than I, the thongs of whose sandals I am not worthy to unloose;" that is to say, for whom I am not worthy to perform the most menial office. The Gospels also apply to the Messiah John's prophecy of Him who would baptize with the Holy Spirit, and with the fire of judgment, and would purify his threshing-floor from chaff with his fan. But we have explained these words as referring not to the coming of the Christ, but to the appearance of God. This "Mightier One" is the Lord, is Yahweh himself. But inasmuch as the metaphor of the sandal-thong is not strictly applicable to any but a man, these words have generally been understood to refer to the Messiah, and consequently all the other promises and threats embodied in John's preaching have been taken in the same sense.

But this is certainly incorrect. In the preaching of John the Messiah completely disappears. This need not surprise us; for we know from our accounts of the religious condition of the Jews in the Captivity, and after the return, that many of the prophets conceived of the Messianic age without a human king (or Messiah). They expected that in this perfect realm of God, this age of Israel's holiness and glory, Yahweh would reign over his people in his own person. We must also observe that John is obviously dependent upon Malachi for his conceptions of the future. Not only did he borrow from this last of the prophets his conception of the task of Elijah, but the whole spirit of his preaching was

1 Luke iii. 15, 16.

2 Matthew iii. 11, 12 (Mark i. 7, 8; Luke iii. 15-18; Acts xiii. 21, 25).

strongly influenced by him. Now Malachi never speaks of the Messiah, but distinctly announces Yahweh's own appearance. We need not therefore be surprised if we find John anticipating, proclaiming, and preparing the kingdom of God itself, without ever speaking of its human ruler. But the strongest proof that we are not mistaken is found in the fact that everywhere in the prophets of the Old Testament, in the Apocryphal books, and in the writings of John's contemporaries, whenever the Messianic judgment is mentioned, the judge is no other than God himself; in no single case is the judgment deputed to the Messiah. The preaching of John can hardly have formed an exception. When he speaks of the Husbandman, of the coming Baptizer, of the Mighty One who handles the axe, he means no other than God.

Moreover, we can readily understand how the Evangelists fell into their mistake. When John, without knowing it beforehand, and without himself intending it, had actually become the precursor of Jesus (the Christ), the Christians could hardly help understanding of their Master and applying to him the predictions which the preacher had uttered of God. "He who comes after me is mightier than 1," he had said; and were not his words fulfilled in Jesus? Moreover, the confusion was favored by the great change which the Messianic expectation underwent in Christian circles. The Apostles and apostolic communities cherished the hope that when Jesus ere long returned from heaven he would himself hold the last judgment. What could be more obvious, therefore, than to explain the utterances of John concerning this judgment as having reference to (Jesus) the Christ? And of course this mistake must have had its influence upon the form in which the preaching of John was handed down and finally recorded.

For when once the tradition had brought John into such close relations with Jesus, it was easy to carry the process a little further. It was first imagined and then asserted that John had stood upon the same hostile footing towards the heads and leaders of the people as that which Jesus occupied. Thus, though the Sadducees and Pharisees had really remained neutral on the whole, Matthew represents them as having come with simulated interest to the baptism, and having drawn from the lips of the prophet the indignant "brood of vipers!" which we have already explained. In the same spirit it is said elsewhere that they were only re

1 Matthew xxv. 31; Romans xiv. 10; 2 Corinthians v. 10.

2 Matthew iii. 7. Compare xii. 34, xxiii. 33.

strained from openly expressing their condemnation of him by their fear of the populace.1

In another respect, however, the tradition has remained remarkably faithful to history. It has not ascribed to John any of those miracles so profusely worked into the history of Jesus.2 The reason is obvious. In the first place, the activity of John does not afford those natural opportunities for the introduction of miraculous stories which occasioned their insertion into the sketch of the life of Jesus; and, besides, the Baptist so soon fell into the shadow of his great successor that the imagination of the Christians soon deserted the forerunner, and busied itself exclusively with the central figure of the Gospel history.

In conclusion: With regard to John, we possess the witness of a contemporary who was better qualified than any other to judge him. Jesus repeatedly spoke of him expressly, and at length. It is from these utterances of Jesus that we derive our accurate knowledge of the man; and it is from them that we have borrowed most of the colors with which we have attempted to paint a true picture of him. Jesus regards him as a messenger of God, as greater than any of the prophets, as the man who roused the conscience of sinners, and intensified the Messianic hope of his contemporaries till it became an impetuous demand. But for all that, Jesus does not attempt to conceal the fact that John stood completely upon Jewish soil, and remained to the backbone a representative of the Law, insisting on the outer duties of religion, and filled with dread of the stern Judge of men. Great as he was, the humblest mortal who had really entered the kingdom of God, who had risen through faith in the love of the Heavenly Father to perfect freedom from all legal compulsion, was greater than he. Thus Jesus could bring his own vocation and work into the very closest connection with those of John, and could see in the lot of his predecessor a foreshadowing of what awaited him; and yet at the same time could place himself in direct contrast with John as the preacher of other good tidings, of another God and another kingdom of heaven.

The sequel of the history will show us the relations in which these two men came to stand towards each other, and the opportunities which Jesus had of observing the whole work and character of this last prophet of the ancient dispensation.

1 Matthew xxi. 26 (Mark xi. 32; Luke xx. 6). 2 Compare John x. 41. Matthew xi. 2-19 (Luke vii. 18-35); Matthew xvii. 12, 13, xxi. 23-32 (Mark xi. 27-33; Luke xx. 1-8).