Truth Magazine

By John A. Welch

Praise Him! praise Him! Jesus our blessed Redeemer!

Heav’nly portals loud with Hosannas ring!

Jesus, Saviour reigneth forever and ever;

Crown Him! crown Him! Prophet, and Priest, and King!

Christ is coming! over the world victorious,

Pow’r and glory unto the Lord belong:

(“Praise Him! Praise Him!,” Abiding Hymns: 280, verse 3).

The offices of Christ have usually been divided into three major categories. They are prophet, priest and king. As prophet he reveals God’s will to man. As priest he compassionately transmits man’s needs to God. As king, he is our ruler and authority.

Jesus, The Prophet

There was confusion among the Jews about the Messiah. Many anticipated a prophet separate from the Messiah. This anticipation was so acute that some expected a physical reappearance of Elijah (to fulfill Mal. 4:5-6) or Jeremiah. This confusion may have been drawn from the inability of the Jews to reconcile the prophecies of the conquering Messiah with those of the suffering servant (Isa. 53). How could a descendant of the persecuted prophets be the same person as the King of Zion?

Their ill-formed conclusions appear in several passages. “Many of the people therefore, when they heard this saying, said, Of a truth this is the Prophet. Others said, This is the Christ” (John 7:40-41; see also John 6:14; Matt. 16:13-14). John the Baptist faced this confusion (John 1:20-21). The apostles made this same mistake at the transfiguration, when Elijah actually appeared. Jesus corrected them: “I say unto you, That Elias is come already, and they knew him not, but have done unto him whatsoever they listed. . . . Then the disciples understood that he spake unto them of John the Baptist” (Matt. 17:12-13; see also 11:14).

The Jews were willing to acknowledge Jesus as a prophet, as are many today. “There came a fear on all: and they glorified God, saying, That a great prophet is risen among us; and, That God hath visited his people” (Lk. 7:16). “The multitude said, This is Jesus the prophet of Nazareth of Galilee” (Matt. 21:11).

Jesus claimed to be a prophet. In Luke 13:31-35, Jesus exhibited no fear of Herod’s threats to kill him “for it cannot be that a prophet perish out of Jerusalem. O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, which killest the prophets, and stonest them that are sent unto thee . . .” Jesus seemed to place himself in the line of the prophets in recounting the parable of the Wicked Husbandmen (Matt. 21:33. 45).

Peter indicated that Moses’ statement concerning a coming prophet in Deut. 18:15 was fulfilled in Jesus. He began by explaining a solution to the Jewish inability to reconcile the King and the Sufferer. “Those things, which God before had showed by the mouth of all his prophets, that Christ should suffer, he hath so fulfilled” (Acts 3:18). He then continued, “For Moses truly said unto the Fathers, A prophet shall the Lord your God raise up unto you of your brethren, like unto me; him shall ye hear in all things whatsoever he shall say unto you” (Acts 3:22).

I do not believe that it is necessary to note the methods of Jesus’ preaching and prophecy in this short study, but we will note the superiority of his revelation above all other prophets. His prophecy was constant, not intermittent. Old Testament prophets could speak only when inspired, yet every word and action of Jesus was teaching or prophecy (John 3:34). His prophecy was complete, not partial. Old Testament prophets did not know all the truth, nor even the end of the things of which they spoke (1 Pet. 1:10-11). Any reserve shown by Jesus was not his inability to declare, but the inability of his disciples to listen (John 16:12). His prophecy was infallible. Old Testament prophets made mistakes because their prophecy was subject to their own faulty prejudice. Thus, Samuel mistook the elder brothers of David for the anointed (1 Sam. 16:6ff), and Nathan told David that he could build the temple (2 Sam. 7:lff). We need not fear for each mistake is noted and corrected by God. Jesus’ prophecy needed no such correction. The prophecy of Jesus was final. “Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone that believeth” (Rom. 10:4; see also Heb. 1:1-3).

Jesus the Priest

There can be no notion of religion without a priest, a mediator: one who will approach God in our behalf. The Hebrew Christians knew Jesus as their Saviour and certain elementary facts of the gospel, but they did not know him as their priest (Heb. 5:10-6:3). In the Old Testament, there was no godly priesthood in Egypt, only redemption. Similar to the Priesthood given at Sinai, Jesus serves as our priest, to reveal man’s true relation to God, to provide access to God, and to prevent fear of approaching him.

The character of the priest determines the nature of the religion. If the priest or his sacrifice is imperfect, then the religion is imperfect. If both are perfect, the conscience will effectively be purged and sin, as a barrier between God and man, will be removed. Paul proved that under the Old Testament imperfection reigned, while in Christ a perfect priest is found. The Old Testament priests were imperfect because they were only allowed to enter the holiest once a year, then not without offering blood for their own sins (Heb. 9:6-9). The sacrifices offered were imperfect because they had to be continually offered. They never effectively did the job of removing sin (Heb. 10:1-4).

In Jesus we have a perfect priest.

“But this man, because he continueth ever, hath an unchangeable priesthood. Wherefore he is able also to save them to the uttermost that come unto God by him, seeing he ever liveth to make intercession for them. For such an high priest became us, who is holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners, and made higher than the heavens; who needeth not daily, as those high priests, to offer up sacrifice, first for his own sins, and then for the people’s: for this he did once when he offered up himself” (Heb. 7:24-27).

The various aspects of his priesthood are set forth in Hebrews. His commission is given in Heb. 5:4-6. He was called of God. not taking this honor to himself. His preparation for this service is cited in several passages. The priest had to be one “who can have compassion on the ignorant, and on them that are out of the way . . .” (Heb. 5:2). Thus, in Jesus’ case, “We have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin” (Heb. 4:15; see also 2:14-18; 5:8). The priest must have a suitable offering (Heb. 8:3; 5:1). Christ’s sacrifice was “his own blood;” Himself “once offered” (Heb. 9:12; 27-28). The scene of His ministry is the sanctuary. The Old Testament priests served a “worldly sanctuary” (Heb. 9:1); Christ serves in “. . . the heavens; a minister of the sanctuary, and of the true tabernacle, which the Lord pitched, and not man” (Heb. 8:1-2). Christ’s intercession is our behalf is so capable of abolishing our fear of approaching God that we may “come boldly unto the throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy, and find grace . . .” (Heb. 4:16). The result of this new priesthood is that we have a “new testament” which enables us to approach God by a “new and living way” (Heb. 9:15; 10:20). “For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law” (Heb. 7:12).

Jesus, the King

The kingship of Jesus was the most disputed of His claims to be the Messiah. The Jews were willing to acknowledge him as the Prophet. Paul explained by the precedent of Melchizedek how Jesus of the tribe of Judah could be a priest (Ps. 110:4; Heb. 7:1-17). The Jews would not accept him as a king. Some have asserted that Jesus never intended to be a king. Some claim that he is not a king yet, but will be in a future millennium.

Christ claimed to be a king. He spoke of the time when “the Son of man shall sit in the throne of his glory” (Matt. 19:28). In two parables He applied this claim to Himself. He obviously applied the Parable of the Pounds to Himself as the nobleman who went into a far country to receive a kingdom (Luke 19:11-27). In explaining the Parable of the Tares, He said, “The Son of man shall send forth his angels, and they shall gather out of the kingdom all things that do offend . . .” (Matt. 13:41).

Jesus was willing to accept the title of king from others. This is a bigoted assumption if the title was not really His to accept. The plea of James and John’s mother was that her sons would receive an exalted place in his kingdom (Matt. 20:20-22). In preparing to enter Jerusalem, Jesus went to some effort to fulfill a prophecy which stated, “Behold, thy King cometh unto thee, meek, and sitting upon an ass, and a colt the foal of an ass” (Matt. 21:5; Zech. 9:9). Upon approaching the city, he was hailed by that title most appropriate, “Blessed be the King that cometh in the name of the Lord” (Luke 19:38).

He was charged and condemned as a king, thus indicating that the people had common knowledge of His claim to be a king. “We found this fellow perverting the nation, and forbidding to give tribute to Caesar, saying that he himself is Christ a King” (Luke 23:2). In replying to the question “Art thou a king then?” Jesus stated, “To this end was I born, and for this cause came I into the world . . .” (John 18:37). Aghast at the inscription of the cross, the Jews pled, “Write not, the King of the Jews; but that he said, I am King of the Jews” (John 19:19-22).

In Acts 2, Peter introduced Jesus as having been by the resurrection raised to sit on the throne of David (Acts 2:30-36). Some argue that His authority is now incomplete. They insist that there is a future and finer manifestation of Christ’s kingdom here on the earth. Yet, now he is “far above all principality, and power, and might, and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this world, but also in that which is to come: and hath put all things under his feet, and gave him to be the head over all things to the church” (Eph. 2:21-22). What is lacking? His authority is absolute. To insist that Christ is not a king now is to ignore some of the most assertive passages of the New Testament.

We might conclude by considering the nature of his kingdom. His kingdom is spiritual. “My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight…. but now is my kingdom not from hence” (John 18:36). Paul later emphasized this by saying, “the weapons of our warfare are not carnal, but mighty through God to the pulling down of strongholds” (2 Cor. 10:4; see also Eph. 6:10-18). It is important to note that this not only excluded all those weapons of steel, brass and wood, but others as well. Second Corinthians is rebuking in context that sort of carnality which Paul condemned in the first letter to these Corinthians. “Ye are yet carnal: for whereas there is among you envying, and strife, and divisions, are ye not carnal, and walk as men?” (1 Cor. 3:3). I often hear brethren bemoan the politics in churches. Some erring brethren seem to feel that if the simple force of their argument will not convince men, then they must campaign and inveigh privately and behind the scenes! This is the sort of smoky room politics that afflicts our governmental affairs. This is just as much a carnal weapon as bashing another in the head with a club. It is just as condemned. Christ never stooped below the spiritual kingdom, nor should its citizens. Christ’s kingdom is a universal kingdom. It is not bound by geography, time, race, or space. “Go ye therefore and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost” (Matt. 28:19). Christ’s kingdom is an eternal kingdom. It will never change or be replaced. It will never be conquered. Its citizens will never have to adapt to new rule. “He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David: and he shall reign over the house of Jacob forever; and of his kingdom there shall be no end” (Luke 1:33; see also Rev. 11:15; 22:5).

Yet, someone will ask about 1 Cor. 15:24-28. It says there will come a time when he will give up His reign as king to God. Certainly, no one denies that there will be no end to his kingdom, but 1 Cor. 15 unmistakably does say that Christ will give up His reign when the last enemy, death, is destroyed.

The answer can be found in the Greek word “ever” in the three passages initially cited. It is the Greek word aion. It variously means age lasting, through the age, or through the ages, depending on whether it is singular or plural. Various phrases where it is used are the “end of the age” (Matt. 24:3 NASV, and many others), “the sons of the age” (Luke 16:8 NASV), “before the ages” (1 Cor. 2:7 NASV), “the ends of the ages” (1 Cor. 10:11, NASV), etc. In the Septuagint version of Ex. 31:17 the Sabbath was a “sign . . . forever.” The preceding verse defines “forever” as lasting “throughout their generations.” Ex. 30:8 reminds the Sabbatarians that the Sabbath would last only on the same basis as would the candlestick and the incense. Thus, the statement of Luke 1:33 is saying that Christ will rule over the house of Judah throughout their generations, not just for a few years as their former kings reigned. This harmonizes with the great commission where Christ comforts us with the statement, “Lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world (aion)” (Matt. 28:19). He will be with us with all authority and power as long as the gospel is being preached or throughout the age. These agree perfectly with the intention of 1 Cor. 15, where Christ will reign as long as the world lasts, throughout our generations, while the gospel is being proclaimed, till the last enemy is destroyed. Then the eternal kingdom will return to the Father.

Truth Magazine, XX:21, pp. 3-6
May 20, 1976

By Earl E. Robertson

While the humanity of Jesus is not assailed and ruthlessly attacked as often as his divinity, it is nonetheless rejected by some and grossly misunderstood by others. The doctrine of the incarnate Son of God is indeed plainly taught in the word of God. Reasons demanding the humanity of Jesus are also given in the Bible. While the fact of his humanity must be emphasized so must also the objectives of incarnation be stressed. We must show that God had reason for Jesus to be “flesh and dwell among men” (John 1:14). We shall show that Christ accomplished all things, while in the flesh, that God sent him to do (John 17:4); being full of grace and truth he brought both to man (John 1:14,17).

So John (1 John 1:1) is declaring that Jesus really lived in the flesh while he was in this world manifesting God. We are aware that while John lived there were certain Jews who did not confess that Jesus Christ “is come in the flesh.” They were deceivers and anti-Christ (2 John 7). While these Docetic Gnostics contended for a phantom body for Jesus, John additionally writes: “Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God: And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is the spirit of anti-Christ, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world” (1 John 4:2-3). To John, the incarnate Jesus was not an illusion! “Docetism” is a theological term derived from the Greek verb dokeo, meaning “to seem.” It was the doctrine that Christ did not actually become flesh, but merely seemed to be a man. These Jews taught that matter (the physical body) is evil. Therefore, to confess the goodness of Jesus would, to them, ,be a denial of his humanity. The apostle John attacks this false doctrine in his letters. Later, Ignatius and Irenaeus dealt extensively with this error. Tertullian wrote some five books against it.

Jesus Lived In A Body Of Flesh

John affirmed that the one “which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled” is Jesus the Christ (1 John 1:1). Not only had John heard Christ but his eyes had seen him and his hands had touched him! This is physical-and this physical is the fleshly body of Christ. The Hebrew writer quotes David, saying, “Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not, but a body hast thou prepared me” (Heb. 10:5). Of this fleshly body he further affirms, “He taketh away the first (Law), that he may establish the second. By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all” (Heb. 10:9b,10). It is called “the body of his flesh” and means simply the body consisted of flesh (Col. 1:22).

Shortly after his birth in Bethlehem he was made to escape from the murderous efforts of Herod the Great by a quick flight into Egypt (Matt. 2:13-15). After the death of Herod, Joseph and Mary along with Jesus returned to their own country (Matt. 2:22-23). It was here in Nazareth that Jesus was reared (Luke 4:16; John 1:45,46). The physical development, along with his moral and spiritual guidance, was here in this place (Luke 2:39-52). This writer says “. . . Jesus increased in stature. . . . This word “stature” has to do with maturity or development, and the lexicographers say “in height and comeliness of stature.” Jesus was successful in his physical growth whereas Zacchaeus was not (Luke 19:3). This metaphorical use of increase or progress is used in the dative case, identifying the thing in which Jesus grew. And the passage says it was in his physical or fleshly development. Just as surely as Zacchaeus was in the flesh but did not grow up, that is, he “was little of stature,” Jesus Christ was in the flesh and did “increase in stature.” To argue against the fleshly existence of Jesus also argues against the fleshly existence of Zacchaeus! Who can believe it?

The doctrine denying that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh not only makes its propagator a liar and anti-Christ, but also nullifies all revelation pertaining to the deeds dependent upon the life of Christ. The deeds of his life from the manger to the cross, and the ascension, are all myth if the teachings of the anti-Christ are true. The scriptures affirming Jesus to be “seed of woman” demand his humanity. Paul makes use of Gen. 3:15 in Gal. 4:4 to emphasize the prophetical impact of the truth that Jesus is of woman. He took not the nature of angels upon himself when he came into this world, but the seed of Abraham (man) (Heb. 2:14-18). Angels could not die (Luke 20:36), but Jesus had to die (Heb. 2:9; 9:28). The deeds of his life as affirmed in the word of God demand his fleshly life. Paul says, “And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory” (1 Tim. 3:16). This passage shows the sphere of his manifestation: “in flesh.” As above shown, John’s eyes had seen and his hands had handled this Jesus made flesh. “Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have” (Luke 24:39).

He Laid Down His Life

The inherent qualities manifesting “the power of an endless life” (Heb. 7:16), set forth the deity of Jesus; but, the humanity of Jesus is declared through the love of God, “because he laid down his life for us” (1 John 3:16). He laid down his life “that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit” (1 Peter 3:18). Paul preached that Christ died and was buried (1 Cor. 15:3,4). He further affirmed, “we have known Christ after the flesh, yet now henceforth know we him no more” (2 Cor. 5:16). This “seed of David according to the flash” is the one who died (Rom. 1:3). No one took his life, he laid it down “of himself” (John 10:17,18).

The purpose of his humanity was that he might adequately represent man to God. Man’s sins demanded death. God’s demand for death for sin would have accomplished nothing by a sinner dying. Man’s salvation then and now depends on the “offering of the body of Jesus Christ” (Heb. 10:10). Only he “who did no sin” could “bare our sins in his own body on the tree” (1 Pet. 2:22,24). However, his death in flesh alone could not have accomplished for man what has been done. That dead body had to be raised! Paul says that Jesus “was delivered for our offences, and raised again for our justification” (Rom. 4:25). He who said “I lay it down of myself,” also tells us “I have power to take it again” (John 10:18). After his passion he was both seen and heard (Acts 1:3). When Thomas felt the resurrected flesh of Jesus, he exclaimed: “My Lord and my God” (John 20:28). Yes, his flesh was made alive (1 Pet. 3:18). The objective of his humanity embraces the fact of his being “a merciful and faithful high priest” for the Christian, and to be “able to succour” the tempted (Heb. 2:17,18). He “was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin” (Heb. 4:15). By having become just as much human as any human being, he could know the trials and burdens that all men have, and do something about them. As a mediator (1 Tim. 2:5), he represents us before God. One can rest with confidence that he will be correctly and sufficiently represented by Jesus before the Almighty.

Conclusion

His birth was physical, he was born of woman; his trials and temptations were real because he was human; he suffered in death because he was flesh; his burial was in a literal tomb because his body was physical; his resurrection was bodily one because it was flesh and would, therefore, offer undeniable evidence of his deity and sufficiency for all the needs of the human family.

R.A. Torrey said, “While the literal bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ is the corner-stone of Christian doctrine, it is also the Gibraltar of Christian evidence, and the Waterloo of infidelity and rationalism.” And I add a hearty amen!

Truth Magazine, XX:21, p. 2-3
May 20, 1976

By Stephen P. Willis

The Greek word kosmos is used by the author of the fourth gospel 78 times.1 It generally means: an apt and harmonious arrangement, an ornament, decoration, or arrangement.2 It has several specific uses that shed a different light on passages according to its meaning. In John, kosmos is used to mean the universe (or earth), the human inhabitants of the earth, the general public, sinful mankind, and the realm of the evil.3 I feel we can limit this to three categories: (1) the created world ,(earth), (2) the created inhabitants of the earth (man), and (3) sinful or alienated man or men.

The purpose of this article will be to examine briefly the relationships of Jesus in reference to the kosmos. In doing so, I was selective of verses cited in Young’s Analytical Concordance, in the article “world (kosmos).”

Creator of the World

First, we see Jesus as the creator who existed before the world (universe). We learn that all things came into being through Him (1:3) and that “all things” include the world (1:10). We read that Jesus was loved before the foundations of the earth; loved by the Father (17:25). Jesus is the eternal creator of the world.

Sent to the World

Secondly, all through the Old Testament we see that man was sinful, but God loved this world’s inhabitants and sent His Son into the world (in the earth and among men, 3:16,17). The Scriptures state that the Word became flesh and dwelt among us (1:14). Jesus took on the form of a man and “tabernacled” in the world. Just as the Christ was sent by the Father, the apostles were sent forth by the Son (17:11-6).

Three items might be observed here: Jesus was a light in the world; He spoke in the world; and Jesus loved His own in the world. The term “light in the world” is used repeatedly in the Gospel, but is best explained in 1:4, 5, 9. The light shone in the darkness and gave life to men. He was rejected and not comprehended by the world. The world did not know Him.

Moses had foretold that there would be a Prophet raised up (Deut. 18:15). Jesus is that Prophet (6:14), and, therefore, speaks for God. He came to tell the will of the Father. He came to teach in order that the world might believe (17:21). He condemned the ruler of this world, that is, Satan (12:31; 14:30; 16:18). He claimed that He would leave this world (13:1) and showed that He was not of the world. All this He taught openly in the world, as He reported to Pilate (18:20). World, here, would refer to the men of the earth.

Still, Jesus was a man and had human compassions. He wept at the burial place of Lazarus (11:35). Jesus, though not of earthly origin, did show His humanity when He thought about leaving this world (earth and men). He did love His own people and was saddened to think that He would leave them behind (13:1).

Not of the World

Although Jesus taught in the world, He made it clear in His teaching that He was not of this world (probably all three definitions would fit here). He taught that His disciples, His peace, His kingdom, and His Spirit were not of this world (14:17, 27; 17:6-25; 18:36). When Jesus spoke to the Jews (8:23), He said, “. . . you are of this world; I am not of this world.” Jesus was from above. He proclaimed and established spiritual things (Mt. 16:18-20).

Purpose of His Coming

Often, we might be asked (or ask ourselves), What purpose did Jesus serve? Why did He come to be rejected and crucified? What did He care about the world? John’s Gospel will reveal the purpose of the Son on earth or in the world.

Jesus came to bear witness of the truth (18:37). He claims that He spoke the truth in 8:45. It is especially interesting to note the word witness. From its Greek root we derive the word “martyr.”4 Jesus was a “martyr” for the truth in every sense of the word. He gave witness to it and even laid down His life for it. He spoke the truth. He was truth.

Another reason Jesus entered the world was to judge the world, i.e. sinful man. We have identified Jesus as the “light of the world,” so let us look at 3:19, where it says, “This is the judgment, that the light is come into the world.” Jesus says, “For judgment I came into the world. . .” (9:39).

But let us seek His true motive, for Jesus said, “for I did not come to judge the world, but to save the world.” Here world is men, whether sinful (totally alienated) or a “good-man-who-still- sins-a-bit.” Let us not think this to be a contradiction to the last paragraph. Many times a grammatical structure such as this is used to emphasize the latter idea (salvation, here), but not totally giving up the former statement (judgment) (cf. 6:29).

Behold! The Savior (4:42)! The Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world (1:29)! With these names, let us not forget the eternal life that is given by the light (3:17). Jesus brought remission of sins, and eternal life to mankind-to the world! What a wonderful mission!

As we have observed, Jesus created the world, He was sent to the world and lived here proclaiming the Message of God. He was in the world, but not of the world. He came to bear witness of the truth, to judge and to save the world.

Victory Over the World

I have kept a very significant point until last. Reviewing these relations with the world, we see Jesus in action against the evil forces that have taken over. Yet during the struggle, Jesus knew the outcome. He spoke plainly to His disciples and told them that they should not fear. We can apply this to ourselves. We should not fear in this world. Why? “In Me you have peace. In the world you have tribulation, but take courage; I have overcome the world” (16:33, emph. mine).

FOOTNOTES

1 Jensen, Irving L., John: a Self-Study Guide. (Chicago: Moody Press), 1970, p. 14.

2 Thayer, Joseph, Greek-English Lexicon. (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Pub. Co.), 1962, pp. 356, 357.

3 Hendriksen, William, The New Testament Commentary: The Gospel According to John. (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House), 1953, p. 79.

4 Robertson, A.T., Word Pictures in the New Testament, Vol. V. (Nashville: Broadman Press), 1932, p. 294.

Truth Magazine, XX:20, p. 13-14
May 13, 1976

By Johnny Stringer]

Preparing the Way (Isa. 40:3-5)

When an Eastern monarch entered upon a journey, it was customary to send harbingers ahead to make certain that the way for the king was prepared. This was especially true when he was to be traveling through barren, little-traveled country, where there would be no path in a condition conducive to traveling. Thus, all obstacles to travel which would hinder the king would be removed, and a path would be prepared for him. This would involve such things as leveling off high places, smoothing over rough places, and filling in low places. Similarly, when the King of kings and Lord of lords began to fulfill His mission among men, there was a need for preparation to be made for Him. As the path of travel needed to be put into proper condition for the earthly king, the hearts of men needed to be put into proper condition for the coming of the heavenly King. John the Baptist was the harbinger who went ahead of Christ to prepare the way for Him.

In serving as the harbinger of Christ, John fulfilled the prophecy of Isaiah: “The voice of him that crieth in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make straight in the desert a highway for out God. Every valley shall be exalted, and every mountain and hill shall be made low: and the crooked shall be made straight, and the rough places plain” (Isa. 40:3-4). The application of this prophecy to John is repeatedly affirmed in the New Testament (Matt. 3:3; Mk. 1:3; Lk. 3:4-6; John 1:23). John obviously did not literally exalt valleys and make mountains low; the point is, his work of preparing the way for Christ was comparable to the harbingers who prepared a way for the earthly king to travel. Isaiah’s language found a figurative application in John the Baptist, as he prepared the hearts of men for the coming of Christ. It was his task to “make ready a people prepared for the Lord” (Lk. 1:17).

In fulfilling this vital function, John preached, “Repent yet for the kingdom of heaven is at hand” (Matt. 3:2). Because of the prophecies contained in the Old Testament scriptures, the Jews to whom John preached had long anticipated a mighty kingdom, to be established by the Christ (“anointed one”) of prophecy. The Christ for Whom they had waited would soon come and establish that kingdom, and in order to prepare the people for His coming and the establishment of His reign, John announced that the time was at hand (near). He called upon men to repent; otherwise men would not be prepared for the kingdom of Christ. Truly, if men’s hearts are not set on serving God, they are ill prepared for the reception of spiritual truths.

The Elijah-Like Preacher

John’s task of turning corrupt hearts to God could not be fulfilled by one who offered nothing but comforting words and people-pleasing platitudes, or by one who spoke without a dogmatic certainty (e.g., “I think this is right, but everyone has a right to his own opinion, and we cannot really be sure about anything . . .”). It could not be fulfilled by the kind of “preacher” who continually wears a sickly little smile on his face and fills his message with sweet, heartwarming little stories. It could not be fulfilled by one who was fearful of speaking plainly lest someone be offended. To bring about the necessary change in the sinful hearts of men, it was imperative that the message be spoken plainly, forcefully, sternly, and with firm conviction. Men had to be made aware in no uncertain terms of their sinfulness and the importance of turning from their wickedness. Hence, the preacher needed to be one similar to Elijah of old.

John the Baptist was indeed precisely what was needed-another Elijah! God had promised, through the prophet Malachi, “Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the Lord: And he shall turn the heart of the fathers to the children, and the heart of the children to their fathers, lest I come and smite the earth with a curse” (Mat. 4:5-6). While this prophecy caused men to expect the return of the literal Elijah, Jesus taught that the reference was to John the Baptist (Matt. 11:14; 17:1013). This does not mean that John was the literal Elijah reincarnated, for he denied being Elijah in person (John 1:21). John, however, was so similar to Elijah that he was figuratively a second Elijah. When the angel Gabriel appeared to Zacharias and promised that he and his wife Elizabeth would have a son (John), he said that John would go before the Lord “in the spirit and power of Elijah” (Lk. 1:17). John was of the same nature and character as Elijah, and his preaching was similar to Elijah’s in its bluntness, its incisiveness, its sternness, its forcefulness.

After the similitude of Elijah, John sternly denounced the sins of the people and warned of the judgment that would come upon the impenitent. In his plain, blunt way, he called the Pharisees and Sadducees a “generation of vipers” (very poisonous snakes), demanded that they bring forth fruits of repentance, and minced no words in informing them that they could not depend upon their physical relation to Abraham for salvation from God’s wrath (Matt. 3:7-9). He forthrightly warned of the punishment to be suffered by those who did not produce the fruits of repentance (Matt. 3:10-12). It was with a sense of urgency that he preached, for if men’s corrupt hearts were not changed, they would be unprepared for the King, and rather than participating in the glories of the kingdom, they would be the miserable recipients of God’s wrath.

John’s straightforward, fearless preaching is well illustrated by his statement to Herod regarding Herodias. He said very simply and directly, “It is not lawful for thee to have her” (Matt. 14:4). That, good reader, is getting right to the point! One simply did not speak to a king in that fashion-unless he was a preacher like Elijah, who had been equally direct and to the point in his dealings with King Ahab (1 Kings 18:1718; 21:17-24). In thus addressing the king, John knew that he could be imprisoned or executed, but he could not but speak truth. In fact, his rebuke finally did result in his execution (Matt. 14:3-12). If John could, in the face of such danger, inform the king that he had no right to live with the woman with whom he was living, surely preachers today should have the courage to tell men when they are living with someone without the scriptural right to do so; yet, many simply avoid the subject altogether, and others go to great lengths to devise theories designed to justify unscriptural marriages (Rom. 7:1-3; Matt. 19:1-12).

John’s manner of life befitted his message. Similar to Elijah’s, it was a plain, simple life of austerity and self-denial (Matt. 3:1-3). He began his preaching in the wilderness of Judea (Matt. 3:1), after spending his early years in the desert (Lk. 1:80). The word rendered “wilderness” and “desert” in the New Testament denotes an uninhabited area. The wilderness of Judea was rugged, rocky, sparsely populated territory west of the Dead Sea and the lower Jordan River. Laboring in such rough territory, he wore appropriate apparel-the coarse, rough garment of camel’s hair, and a girdle that was made of plain leather rather than the soft linen or silk that was worn by many. He ate the food that was plentifully available to him in the outdoors-locusts and honey. While his eating of locusts may not be appetizing to our tastes, it is not at all incredible. Locusts were specified in the Law as proper for the Jew to eat (Lev. 11:22), and they are still eaten by some. It would be expected that one living in such circumstances would possess a stern, rugged character, and such a personality is reflected in John’s stern preaching. As his manner of life was not soft, neither was his preaching. As his manner of life was plain, so was his preaching plain and straightforward, unembellished with meaningless flowery speech. It was most fitting that John live a life of austerity and self-denial as he denounced the self-indulgence, the greed, and the materialistic attitudes of men and women, calling upon them to deny themselves and devote their lives to God. As John preached repentance to those whose hearts were centered on material luxuries, his own austerity was a living protest against their sinful self-indulgence.

His Baptism

As John preached repentance, seeking to turn men’s hearts to God so that they would be prepared for the coming of the Christ, he baptized them in the Jordan. It was due to his baptizing that he was called “the Baptist”-that is, the baptizer. The word “baptist” is basically a Greek word, which would be accurately translated by the English word “immerser.” His baptism was for the remission of sins (Mk. 1:3). Of course, sin cannot be remitted apart from the blood of Christ (Heb. 9:22-10:4; Matt. 26:28), and Christ had not yet shed His blood when John baptized. Nevertheless, God knew that Christ would shed His blood, and knowing that the price would be paid for their sins, God could for all practical purposes consider their sins forgiven when they submitted to John’s baptism. The blood of Christ would cover their sins, as it did the sins of their forefathers who had manifested faith (Heb. 9:15).

John’s baptism must be viewed in the context of his overall mission-preparing men for the coming of Christ and His kingdom. People repented, turned to God, and were baptized for the remission of their sins because of their faith in John’s teaching that the kingdom was coming soon and because of their desire to be a part of that kingdom. They were determined that when Christ came, they would be loyal to His rule and share in the joys of His kingdom. After Christ had come and set up His kingdom (Col. 1:13), the baptism of John, since it had been in anticipation of His coming, was no longer valid. Therefore, we read that the group in Ephesus who had been baptized “unto John’s baptism,” needed to be baptized “in the name of Christ” (Acts 19:1-5). They had been baptized because of their faith in John’s teaching that the Christ was coming to establish His kingdom, but they needed to be baptized because of their faith that Christ had already come, died for their sins, and established His reign. These are essential facts of the gospel to be believed prior to New Testament baptism (Mk. 16:16; 1 Cor. 15:1-4; Rom. 10:9; Acts 2:33-38).

His Exaltation of Christ, Not Self

John had no illusions regarding his own position. He recognized that he was but a forerunner of the Christ. He was fully aware that the Christ, not His harbinger, was the One of supreme importance. His aim was not to attract people to himself, but to point them to the Christ. He always denied that he was the Christ, affirming that he was merely the harbinger to prepare the way for the Christ; and he ever proclaimed the vast superiority of Christ over himself, saying that he was not even worthy to perform the most menial act of service for the Christ, such as loosing and carrying His shoes (Matt. 3:11; Mk. 1:7; Lk. 3:15-16; John 1:19-23; 3:28). After the temptation of Jesus, John saw Him coming and pointed Him out to his own disciples as “the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sins of the world”; as a result, some of John’s disciples began to put their faith in Jesus as the Christ (John 1:29-42). John’s attitude is well summed up in his humble words to his disciples in reference to the Christ: “He must increase, but I must decrease” (John 3:30).

Christ’s Approval of John

While John was in prison as a result of his rebuke of Herod, he sent his disciples to inquire of Jesus whether He was truly the Christ (Matt. 11:2). Why He sent them is a matter of speculation, since John had previously affirmed without doubt that Jesus was the Christ. Some say he sent them for their own strengthening, and not because of his personal need. Perhaps it was because his imprisonment had caused him to be discouraged so that he needed reassurance. Whatever the reason for John’s query, Jesus replied by pointing to His works; they spoke for themselves (Matt. 11:4-5). After the disciples of John had departed, Jesus addressed the multitudes regarding John the Immerser (Matt. 11:7-14).

He first asked them what kind of man had attracted them out to the wilderness. Had the one in the wilderness whom they had gone to see been a “reed shaken with the wind?” The answer obviously was, no. Jesus thus drew attention to the fact that John was not weak, wavering, and vacillating. He was not one who was like the tall, slender reed by the Jordan which would passively bend with the wind. Rather, he was strong, stedfast, as a mighty oak. He stood for right and no force could sway him. Jesus then asked the multitudes if the one who had attracted them to the wilderness had been a man clothed in soft raiment, such as is found in king’s palaces. Jesus thus drew attention to the fact that John was a man who lived a life of selfdenial, not indulging himself in material luxuries. He did not seek the soft, easy life, which would demand compromise of convictions. Had he done so, perhaps he could have been in the king’s palace-rather than the king’s prison. Through these questions Jesus paid tribute to the firm, strong character of John.

Jesus proceeded to affirm that John was not merely a prophet, but more than a prophet. He was in fact the subject of prophecy. He held the unique distinction of being the harbinger of the King of kings. Jesus asserted that of all who had been born of women, none had been greater than John the Immerser. What a remarkable statement! Jesus could not have paid John a higher tribute. There could have been no greater. mission for a mere human to perform than that of being the forerunner of the Christ, and there could have been no more eminently qualified human to perform that mission than John the Immerser. Yet, in spite of his greatness, Jesus averred that the least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than John (Matt. 3:11)! Surely, the least in the kingdom is not greater from the standpoint of character, strength, and dedication to God. The least in the kingdom is greater only in the sense that he enjoys an honor and a privilege that John never enjoyed. John, the harbinger of the Christ and His kingdom, died before that kingdom was established; hence, he was not permitted the privilege of being a part of the kingdom of which he preached..

Truth Magazine, XX:20, pp. 10-12
May 13, 1976