CONNECTION TO JOHN THE BAPTIST - December 16, 2004

Homily for December 16, 2004

CONNECTION TO JOHN THE BAPTIST

Today’s Gospel is taken from John 5:33-36. It talks about the real identity of John the Baptist according to this gospel of the Apostle John.

Let us first paraphrase the whole of this gospel in order to understand what it is saying  to us now.

First, is verse 33.  It says: They sent messengers to John.

Who were these messengers?  They were priests and Levites from Jerusalem sent by the Jews (Jh, 1:19).

It is historically note-worthy to remember that John the Baptist did not belong to the existing two Jewish religious sects at that time, the Pharisees and the Sadducees (Cf. Mt. 3:7), but belonged to another sect, the Essenes. The Essenes and the Pharisees both belonged to the Hasidean (the “devout” mentioned in 1 Mac. 2:42) party, which was devoted to the Law.  When the Hasideans later rejected the policies of the Hasmonaeans, the Pharisees and the Essenes split into two separate groups. The Pharisees were identified with the Hasmonaean Party and Herodian Dynasty, whose policy was to cooperate with the foreign (the Greeks and the Romans) conquerors of the Holy Land. On the Sadducees, see note on Acts 23:8 of the Jerusalem Bible.

Hence, politically and religiously, John the Baptist belonged to the Essenes community. We now know extensively about this community with the recent discovery of the Qumran caves, which was one of the prosperous Essenes centers at the time of John the Baptist and Jesus Christ. The Essenes was a Jewish sect, founded on the Hasidean tradition, which strongly believed in the restoration of the glory of ancient Israel through the coming of the promised successor king to the Davidic throne, who is the Messiah, the Christ, and the Savior of Israel, who will liberate the people from foreign domination by the Romans. They did not recognize the Temple built by Herod the Great at Jerusalem, and, therefore, they rejected its priesthood, its religion, and its traditions. They remained as the assembly, or the “church”, in the wilderness (Dt. 4:10, 9:10, 18:16; Ac 7:38, Rev. 12:14), until the time that the full glory of the Davidic kingdom and its Temple will once more be established with the coming of the promised Messiah, who is the successor of King David (2 Sam. 7:1+, 7:12,, Is. 9:5f, 11:1f, Mi. 5:1-3, Mt. 1:1+, Rom. 1:3, 1 Tim. 3:16, Heb. 7:14, Rev. 22:16). Hence, the Essenes communities scattered throughout the Palestinian deserts were alive and burning with the Messianic hope and expectation. It is in this context that John the Baptist and Jesus Christ, another member of the Essenes community, performed their individual ministry. As they belonged to the Essenes tradition, they opposed the Pharisees and the Sadducees, their priests, Levites, and all the other Jewish religious leaders, whom they believed had politically compromised the ancient faith of Israel when these chose to cooperate and coexist with the foreign conquerors of their country.

Why did the Jews send these priests and Levites from Jerusalem to John the Baptist?  Because: “A feeling of expectancy had grown among the people, who were beginning to think that John might be the Christ” (Lk. 3:15), the longed- for-Messiah, the Anointed son of David who was promised to come, the Savior of Israel.

What did these priests and Levites do to John the Baptist? They asked him, “Who are you?”

          Verse 33 continues… And he gave his testimony to the truth.

          Why did John testify to the truth?  Because he was:   

v a witness (Jh. 1:7,8.15, Cf. Mt. 6:22-23);

v a herald or precursor (Lk. 1:76, Act 13:24);

v a messenger, an envoy or emissary (Ml. 3:1).

         

What is the truth in John’s  testimony?  That he was not:

v Elijah (or the reincarnation of Elijah) (Jh. 1:21, Ml. 3:23-24, Mt. 17:10-13), who was taken bodily to heaven;

v The Prophet Moses (Dt. 18:15,18), Nb. 12:7+), who was also taken bodily to heaven (Dt. 34:6, Jude 9);

v The Christ (Jh. 1:20, 3:28; Lk. 3:15, Ac 13:25);

v Nor as the one they imagined him to be (Act 13:25);  Regarding the resurrection of John the Baptist, see Herod’s belief that Jesus is the resurrected John the Baptist (Mt. 14:2+).

Therefore, who was he?

 “Who are you? We must take back an answer to those who sent us. What have you to say about yourself?” asked these priest and Levites from Jerusalem whom the Jews sent to John the Baptist (Jh. 1:22).

John’s answer is:

v I AM  A VOICE IN THE WILDERNESS (Jh. 1:23). “A voice cries, ‘Prepare in the wilderness a way for YHWH. Make a straight highway for our God across the desert’ (Is. 40:3)”…”A highway undefiled, a sacred way…the unclean may not travel by it, nor fools stray along it” (Is. 35:8).

Wilderness means “eremus” (Latin), “yermo” (Sp.), “desert” (Eng.) from where the word “hermit”or “hermitage” (“hermita” or house in the wilderness) comes from.

In saying that John the Baptist was “a voice in the wilderness”, Apostle John was clearly indicating the connection of John the Baptist to the Essenes communities found at Qumran and the Jordan territory of Judea. These desert communities were the continuation and the reliving of the assembly, or “church”, in the wilderness during the times of Moses, Joshua and the Judges, the first two kings, and the prophets of ancient Israel (cf. Dt. 4:10, Ac 7:38), wherein the center was the tent sanctuary  (Cf. Ex. 25:40, 2 S. 7:6, Ac. 7:44, Heb. 8:2,5). John the Baptist, therefore, was a minister, a priest (Cf. Lk. 1:7) of this church, or assembly, in the wilderness.

v YOU, LITLE CHILD, SHALL BE CALLED PROPHET OF THE MOST HIGH (Lk. 1:76) …Much more than a prophet, “Since of all children born of women, a greater than John the Baptist has never been seen” (Mt. 11:9,11).

But, what kind of prophet?  A prophet with the spirit and power of Elijah (Lk. 1:17, Mt. 17:10-13, Ml. 3:23-24, Mt. 11:14).

On Elijah, please read Si. 48:1,10; Ml. 3:23. He murdered, by means of beheading,  the 100 priests of Baal. He was taken up bodily in a chariot of fire. John the Baptist was believed to be the reincarnation of Elijah. Hence, John the Baptist paid for the crime of Elijah, by being beheaded himself, on orders of Herod.

          What ministry did John the Baptist do? Proclaimed a baptism of repentance  (Ac. 13:23-25)…by confessing sins while being baptized (Mt. 3:6)…as a way to prepare for the coming of the Messiah (Ac. 13:23-25), in order to reveal the Messiah (Jh. 1:15, 30-31).

Where did John baptize this baptism of repentance? In the Jordan District in Judaea.

          This is the truth about which John the Baptist performed his priestly ministry. By birth, he was a priest, being descended from the priestly clan of the Levites, because his father Zachary (who belongs to the priestly clan of Abijah), and his mother Elizabeth (a descendant of Aaron), were all members of the levitical tribe (Cf. Lk. 1:5).

          But, was John the Baptist the priestly Messiah (Heb. 7:1f)? Can the expected savior of Israel come once more from the levitical line of the Temple priesthood, just like the Maccabean period?

          Because of his popularity, John the Baptist, was acclaimed by the people as the priestly Messiah (Lk. 1:17, 76; 3:15). Even Jesus himself said so: “And he, if you will believe me, is the Elijah who was to return” (Mt. 11:9, 14, 17, 10-13, Mk. 9:11-12).

          But what is the connection of the priestly messiaship of John the Baptist to the messiaship of Jesus Christ, according to this gospel of the Apostle John? Let us continue with the next verses of this gospel.

In verse 34, it says: “Not that I depend on human testimony, no, it is for your salvation that I speak of this.

          “I may be testifying on my own behalf, but the Father who sent me is my witness too” (Jh. 8:18)…”Besides, the Father who sent me bears witness to me himself” (Jh. 5:37, Jh 2:11+, 6:14-15, 1 Jh. 5:9).

          “The people seeing this sign he had given, said: ‘This really is the prophet who is to come into the world’” (Jh. 6:14)”.

          “We accept the testimony of human witnesses, but God’s testimony is much greater, and this is God’s testimony, given as evidence for his Son” (1 Jh. 5:9).

         

In verse 35, it says: “John was a lamp alight and shining and for a time you were content to enjoy the light that he gave.

          “He was not the light, only a witness to speak for the light” (Jh. 1:8).

          “Then the prophet Elijah arose like a fire, his swords flaring like a torch” (Si. 48:1).

          “But when he saw a number of Pharisees and Sadducees coming for baptism, he said to them, “Brood of vipers..” (Mt. 3:7).

Apostle John made Jesus say that John the Baptist was not the light, but only a lamp, which is a bearer of the light. As the “Elijah who was to return” (reincarnated Elijah), John the Baptist possessed the “spirit and power” of Elijah (Lk. 1:17), “who rose like a fire, with swords flaring like torches” (Si. 48:1). John the Baptist possessed this character of Elijah when he lashed at the Pharisees and Sadducees who came to him for baptism: “You, brood of vipers…” (Mt. 3:7). But, John the Baptist, like prophet Elijah, was merely a lamp, who rose like fire, with swords flaring like torches. Jesus Christ was the light (Jh. 8:12+). (The theme of light-darkness contrast came to be used to the mutually hostile worlds of good and evil. Cf. the Essene texts of Qumran).

          Light and lamp must go together. And so Jesus Christ, as the light, and John the Baptist, as the lamp, must also go together.

          Let us see the last verse, before we make the conclusion.

In verse 36, it says: “But my testimony is greater than John’s: The works my Father has given me to carry out; these same works of mine testify that the Father has sent me.”

          “Jesus replied, ‘I have told you, but you do not believe. The works I do in my Father’s name are my witness” (Jh. 10:25).

          What are these works that bear witness that Jesus is the one sent by the Father? His signs and his miracles.

          “This is the first of the signs given by Jesus: it was given at Cana in Galilee. He let his glory be seen, and his disciples believed in him” (Jh. 2:11+).

          “This was the second sign given by Jesus, on his return from Judaea to Galilee” (Jh. 4:54). (On the Cure of the Nobleman’s son). 

King Herod believed that such powers were generated because Jesus was the resurrected John the Baptist (Mt. 14:2).

          The testimony about the Kingdom of Heaven is greater than either John the Baptist or Jesus Christ individually taken. Our salvation needs both John the Baptist and Jesus Christ, like the lamp and the light, always taken together. Hence, the proper connection between John the Baptist and Jesus Christ must be established clearly and immediately.

          What is the real and proper connection between John the Baptist and Jesus Christ?

          As we said, John the Baptist was the priest Messiah (of the Aaron-Abijah line of the Levitical priesthood).

How about Jesus Christ? He was not descended from the priestly clan, like John the Baptist (Heb. 7:14), but was a descendant of King David (Rt. 7:42, Mt. 1:1+, 9:27+, 12:23, 15:23, 21:9, Lk. 1:32, Jh. 7:42). Therefore, he was a king or royal Messiah, from the lineage of King David.

These two, therefore, are closely linked together in the dispensation of salvation. John the Baptist, who was the priest Messiah, needed Jesus Christ, who was the king Messiah, just like the two bronze pillars of the Temple, the Jachin (priestly) pillar and the Boaz (kingly) pillar, supporting together the stability of the theocracy of Israel.

But with the arrest (Mt. 4:12) and eventual death of John the Baptist, Jesus had succeeded him (Mt. 4:12) in John the Baptist’s ministry (Mk. 10:40, Jh. 3:36). This event was already foretold when John the Baptist baptized Jesus Christ in the Jordan River (Mk. 1:7p), making him the legitimate successor of John the Baptist, since Jesus’ baptism at the Jordan River was some sort of an ordination to the priesthood. Hence, after the death of John the Baptist, Jesus Christ, the King Messiah, legitimately assumed the Priestly Messiaship of John the Baptist, making him the Priest-King Messiah like the priest-king Melchisedek of old (Heb. 7:1p). Henceforth, the two bronze pillars of the Temple that supported the stability of the Old Testament religion and theocracy, became, in Jesus Christ, a one single bronze pillar (combining unto Himself the kingly and priestly powers) of the New Testament Church. Jesus Christ’s assumption of both the priestly and kingly powers is necessary so that he may become like King David, his ancestor, who was both shepherd (religious) and leader (political) of my people Israel” (1 Ch. 11:2)

This is the meaning of the words of Jesus Christ, as written by Apostle John in today’s gospel, when he said: “No, it is for your salvation that I speak of this” (Jh. 5:35).

Understanding this proper connection between John the Baptist and Jesus Christ is very important indeed for our salvation.

This connection is very necessary to understand and accept the development and legitimacy to the sole claim of Messiaship by Jesus Christ. Even John the Baptist affirmed this claim of Jesus Christ while he was still alive when he said: “I am not he (the Messiah), but the one who follows me is greater than me.” (Jh. 1:15,26,30). “I am baptizing with water, but He will baptize with the Holy Spirit” (Mk. 1:7, Jh. 1:33, see also Jh. 3:27-36).

This new understanding of the old Jewish expectation for the promised Messiah, which was now fully realized in the one person of Jesus Christ, was also necessary for the realization of the salvation of the non-Israelites, the pagans, as spoken to in today’s first reading (Is. 56:1-3, 6-8) by prophet Isaiah. Jesus Christ inaugurated a new Temple and a new religion

for all mankind, irregardless of race, color or nationality.

Conclusion:

By way of concluding this present discussion, after establishing the proper Messianic connection between John the Baptist and Jesus Christ, let us now put the biblical principle that: it is not proper and right for the priestly (spiritual) power to assume the kingly (political) power, just like what happened during the Maccabean times that created the Hasmonaean and Herodian dynasty which ruled Israel until the destruction of the Second Temple in 70 A.D. But it is right and proper for the kingly (political) power to assume the priestly (spiritual) power, as it was began by King David and King Solomon when, as kings of Israel, started to build, and  finally completed, the building of the First Temple, and, which precedent, was followed by Jesus Christ, the Messiah Savior, in order to fulfill what God has spoken through the prophet that he shall be both “(spiritual) shepherd and (political)leader of my people Israel” (1 Ch. 11:2).

Tomorrow, we will see the connection of the Messiah to Patriarch Abraham and King David, our second Messianic connection.