THE KING’S BUSINESS
123
d e rsto o d th e prom ise, a n d J o h n d i rects his d en ial to th e Jew ish ex p e c ta tion s o f th e b o d ily re tu rn of E lijah, a n d th e ac tu a l re in c a rn ation o f E lijah he w as not. F u rth e rm o re , his m ission d id n o t exhau st th e p rom ise of th e com ing of E lijah : in a d d i tion to th e com ing o f J o h n th e B ap tist in th e sp irit an d p ow e r o f Elijah, E lijah him self is to com e (M att. 1 7 :1 1 .) But it w ou ld h av e be en very easy, a n d w ith ap p a re n tly much justification, if J o h n th e B ap tist h a d y ie ld ed to tem p ta tio n a n d said, “ I am ,” in stead o f hum b ly saying, as he d id , “ I am n o t.” T h e re is one p o s sibility still left in th e m ind o f th e comm ittee— th e y p u t it v e ry briefly, “A rt th o u th e p ro p h e t? ” o r ra th e r follow ing th e fo rm o f th e original, “The prophet a r t th o u ? ” By “th e p ro p h e t” is p ro b a b ly m e a n t th e p ro p h e t p re d ic te d in D eu te ro n om y 18 :15 , b u t th ey in te rp re te d this p a s sage n o t in th e co rre c t w ay a s re fe r ring to th e C h rist H im self (cf. A c ts 3 :2 1 -2 6 ; 7 :3 7 ) , b u t to som e o th e r p ro p h e t w ho shou ld com e in connection w ith th e com ing o f th e Christ. J o h n also denies th a t he is even “ th e p ro p h e t.” J o h n th e B ap tist’s den ials grew sh o rte r an d sh o rt er. T o th e first question his answ er was, “ I am n o t th e C h rist” ; to th e second question th e answ er was, “ I am n o t” ; a n d to. th e th ird question h e sim ply answers, “N o .” V . 22. “Then said they (ra th e r, they said therefore) unto him, Who art thou? that we may give an ans wer to them that sent us. What sayest thou of thyself?” T h e y h a d exh au sted all th e possi bilities in th e case th a t occu rred to them . T h ey w ere a t th e ir w it’s end an d m u st a p p e a l to Jo h n him self to d e c la re ju st w ho o r w h a t h e was. V . 23. “He said, I am the voice (th e re is no “th e ” b e fo re voice in th e orig inal) of one crying in the wilderness, Make straight the way of
itation, h e g lad ly owns th a t in h im self h e w as n o th ing great. “H e co n fessed a n d d en ied n o t.” T h e com b in a tio n o f th e po sitive a n d negative sta tem en t to express th e fullness o f th e tru th is qu ite characteristic of John . (S e e e. g. Ch. 3 :1 6 ; 6 :5 0 ; 1 Jo h n 1 :5 ; 2 :4 , 2 7 ; 5 :1 2 .) T h e re w as ab so lu tely no h o ld in g b a c k or h esitation on th e p a rt o f th e B ap tist in refusing all h o n o r fo r himself. T h e y th o u g h t he m igh t b e th e Christ, b u t in th e m o st em p h a tic w ay h e d e clares, “ I am n o t th e C h rist.” T h e re is g re a t em phasis on th e “ I.” H e w ou ld h a v e th em u n d e rsta n d th o r oughly th a t n o t he, b u t ano th e r, o f w hom h e is a b o u t to tell, is in d e ed th e Christ. T h e y h a d n o t ask ed him in so m an y w o rd s if h e w e re th e Christ, b u t h e u n d e rsto o d th e real anim us o f th e question a n d a n s w e red th e sp irit of th e question ra th e r th a n th e m ere fo rm of it. T h ro u g h o u t th e en tire section in th e G re ek th e re is a n o tew o rth y em p h a sis u p o n th e p ro n o u n “ I” (vs. 2 3 , 2 6 , 2 7 , 3 0 , 3 1 , 3 3 , 3 4 ) . E v e ry w here Jo h n th e B ap tist em phasizes his pe rson a l relation to th e Christ. V . 21. “And they asked him, what then? Art thou Elias (Elijah) ? and he saith, I am not. Art thou that (ra th e r, “the” ) prophet, and he answered, No.” T h e first in te rro g a tio n m a rk in this verse m igh t w ith equal p ro p rie ty b e p u t a fte r th e w o rd “ th o u ,” th en it w ou ld read , “W h a t th e n a rt tho u ? A rt th o u E lija h ? ” It do e s n o t m uch m a tte r fo r th e sense is p ractically th e same. E lijah w as comm on ly ex p e c ted am o n g th e Jew s as th e fo re ru n n e r o f th e D ay o f th e L o rd (M ai. 4 :1 -6 ; cf. M att. 1 7 :1 0 ), a n d this led to th e question on th e p a rt o f th e comm ittee from Jeru salem . In a v e ry real sense J o h n th e B ap tist was E lijah (M a tt. 17 :12 , 1 3 ;L u k e 1 :1 7 ; M a tt: 1 1 :1 4 ) , b u t h e was n o t E lijah in th e w ay th a t th e Jew s literally u n
Made with FlippingBook flipbook maker