The ministry of John the baptist.

Mark 1.2-6, Matthew 3.1-6, Luke 3.1-6.

Jesus’s story begins with John bar Zachariah, “the baptist.” (As opposed to “the Baptist,” meaning someone from the Baptist movement, which takes its customs of believer-baptism and full immersion from John’s practice.)

Mark 1.2-5 KWL

2Like it’s written in the prophet Isaiah:

“Look, I send my agent to your¹ face,

who’ll prepare your¹ road.” Ml 3.1

3“A voice shouting out in the wilderness:

‘Prepare the Lord’s road!

Make him a straight path!’ ” Is 40.3

4 John the baptist comes into the wilderness,

preaching a baptism of repentance—

to have one’s sins forgiven.

5The whole Judean country,

all Jerusalemites, go out to him

and are baptized by him in the Jordan River,

confessing their sins.

Matthew 3.1-3 KWL

1In those days John the baptist appears,

preaching in the Judean wilderness,

2saying, “Repent!

For heaven’s kingdom has come near.”

3For this is the word through the prophet Isaiah, saying,

“A voice shouting out in the wilderness:

‘Prepare the Lord’s road!

Make him a straight path!’ ” Is 40.3

Luke 3.1-6 KWL

1In the 15th year of Cæsar Tiberius’s governance,

Pontius Pilatus governing Judea,

Herod Antipas as governor over the Galilee,

Herod Philip his brother as governor over Ituría and Trachonítis provinces,

Lysanias as governor over Abiliní,

2Annas and Joseph Kahiáfa as head priests,

God’s message came through John bar Zechariah,

in the wilderness.

3John went into all the land round the Jordan,

preaching a baptism of repentance—

to have one’s sins forgiven—

4like the prophet Isaiah’s sayings,

written in the bible:

“A voice shouting out in the wilderness:

‘Prepare the Lord’s road!

Make him a straight path!’

5All ravines will be filled.

All roads and hills knocked down.

The crooked will be straightened.

The rough into smooth roads.

6All flesh will see God’s salvation.” Is 40.3-5

John doesn’t come first just ’cause of the chronology—John was prophesied to his father before Jesus was to his mother; John was born before Jesus; John’s ministry began before Jesus’s. The chronology was kinda irrelevant, because as John himself pointed out, Jesus existed before he did. Jn 1.30 And as the gospel of John points out, the word of God, the light of the world: John came to testify about that light, and point people to him.

That was John’s job. He was Jesus’s opening act.

Yeah, Christians tend to call him Jesus’s forerunner. Which he kinda was. But a “forerunner” in antiquity was simply the guy who ran way in front of the caravan—which could be of a visiting lord or invading army—and announce they’re coming. Again, John kinda was that. But he didn’t just proclaim Messiah, or God’s kingdom, was coming. He got people ready for the coming, by getting ’em to repent, by washing them clean first.

Christians also tend to call him Jesus’s herald. He was kinda that too. But a herald came instead of the person whose message he brought. You know, like prophets tell us what God’s saying, instead of (or in addition to) God telling us what he’s saying. John wasn’t a substitute for the Messiah he preceded; he said his superior was coming right behind him, and he considered himself unworthy to take Messiah’s shoes off. Mk 1.7 But Jesus would soon speak for himself.

John’s ministry began, as Luke pins it down, in the year 28, when both John and Jesus (figuring they were born in 7BC or so) were about 34 years old. He’s described as being in the ἐρήμῳ/erímo, undeveloped, unfarmed land—places where people neither lived nor worked, and couldn’t drive John off as a nuisance. We might call it the countryside or go with the KJV’s “wilderness.” There, John announced the kingdom was coming. So people, get ready!

Malachi’s prophecy.

You might notice Mark mashed together two bible quotes: “Look, I send my agent to your face…” Ml 3.1 and “A voice shouting out in the wilderness…” Is 40.3 The author incorrectly identified both as from Isaiah, but the first line comes from Malachi, and is also found in Matthew and Luke when Jesus had some praiseworthy things to say about John.

Matthew 11.9-10 KJV

9But what went ye out for to see? A prophet? yea, I say unto you, and more than a prophet. 10For this is he, of whom it is written, Behold, I send my messenger before thy face, which shall prepare thy way before thee. Ml 3.1

Usually Christians translate περισσότερον προφήτου/perissóteron profítu as “more than a prophet” (KJV), and since perissóteron, “significantly greater [thing]” could either be a possession of, or attribute of, the prophet, I went with the second idea.

What’s the Old Testament context? Glad you asked.

Malachi 3.1-4 KJV

1Behold, I will send my messenger, and he shall prepare the way before me: and the Lord, whom ye seek, shall suddenly come to his temple, even the messenger of the covenant, whom ye delight in: behold, he shall come, saith the LORD of hosts. 2But who may abide the day of his coming? and who shall stand when he appeareth? for he is like a refiner’s fire, and like fullers’ soap: 3and he shall sit as a refiner and purifier of silver: and he shall purify the sons of Levi, and purge them as gold and silver, that they may offer unto the LORD an offering in righteousness. 4Then shall the offering of Judah and Jerusalem be pleasant unto the LORD, as in the days of old, and as in former years.

The gospels weren’t quoting the Septuagint, whose version of verse 1 (“Look, I send out my angel, and he’ll look over the road before my face”) is closer to the Hebrew than the gospels.

The Greek word ἄγγελοςánghelos means “agent.” Most of the time it refers to a מַלְאָךְ/malákh a heavenly messenger from the LORD, sent to say stuff or do stuff on his behalf. We’ve turned the Greek word into our word angel. But a malákh/ánghelos can equally refer to a human messenger from the LORD, namely one of his prophets. (Like מַלְאָכִֽי/malákhi, “my agent,” i.e. Malachi.)

In Malachi the angel/agent prepares the road for God. In the gospels, it prepares the road for God’s people. Obviously the authors of the New Testament believed they got its meaning correct: Preparing the road for God’s people is preparing the road for God. God’s agent would get the people ready to meet their Maker, who’s in the form of Jesus.

In Malachi the LORD speaks of purifying בְּנֵֽי לֵוִי֙/benéy Leví, “the descendants of Levi,” the Levites, his priests. Every member of the tribe of Levi was a priest—including John, whose parents were descendants of Aaron, a Levite. Lk 1.5, Ex 4.14 The priests were meant to represent God to his people, but in Malachi’s day they’d been breaking his Law. Ml 2.7-9 And one of the things Pharisees taught (as do we Christians) is all God’s kids are his priests. We all represent him to others. Yet we break his commands all the time, and do the same as the priests in Malachi—we tell sinners God’s okay with them no matter what they do; that thanks to grace God doesn‘t even care what we do. Ml 2.17 We preach cheap grace. Not repentance. Nor obedience.

True of Malachi’s day, true of ours, true of John’s. True of human nature. Part of John’s duty, to get the people ready for Jesus, was to get ’em to repent. They needed to quit thinking they were guaranteed salvation because they were elect, Lk 3.8 or because all they had to do was throw more dead animals on God’s altar. Is 1.11-17 God wants a relationship with us, and for us to live in his light. He’s tired of our useless shortcuts to righteousness.

John said as much when he talked about his own ministry later in Luke. Which I’ll get to. Now for Isaiah.

Isaiah’s prophecy.

When we get to Isaiah’s prophecy, Luke and the other gospels did quote the Septuagint. I translated it for you so you can see how it matches. I’ll point out the minor differences between the Septuagint’s translation and the original Hebrew.

Luke 3.4-6 KWL

4C“A voice shouting out in the wilderness:

‘Prepare the Lord’s road!

Make him a straight path!’

5All ravines will be filled.

All roads and hills knocked down.

The crooked will be straightened.

The rough into smooth roads.

6All flesh will see God’s salvation.” Is 40.3-5

Isaiah 40.3-5 LXX (KWL)

3A voice shouting out in the wilderness:

“Prepare the Lord’s road!

Make our God a straight path!”

4All ravines will be filled.

All roads and hills knocked down.

All crooked will be straightened.

The rough road into flat roads.

5The Lord’s glory will be seen,

and all flesh will see God’s salvation.

For the Lord has spoken.

Isaiah’s prophecy was to tell the people of Jerusalem that God had pardoned their sin Is 40.2 and had good news for them. Is 40.9 The Septuagint added the word σωτήριονsotírion, “salvation, rescue” to verse 5, but that is the point of Isaiah 40. Straighten out the desert highways, ’cause Israel’s exiles were taking them to come home; but the gospels’ authors figured this idea fit well with the fact John preached in the wilderness of southern Israel, much of which is desert.

Now, remember: Fulfillment doesn’t mean Isaiah predicted John. It only means there’s a parallel between Old Testament verses and New Testament events. Isaiah wrote of a voice shouting in the wilderness, and John was just such a voice in the wilderness. So there’s a parallel. Some prophecies are predictions of New Testament events, but this isn’t that. It’s simply a reminder: “Y’know that bit in Isaiah about a voice in the wilderness? Here ya go.” It’s not always in context, and not meant to be. (Although other apostles, and Jesus, were way better about quoting scriptures in context.)

And just like the voice shouts, John did prepare the way for Jesus.

John’s appearance.

Luke didn’t bother to describe what John looked like; just what he did and said. There is some hint about his appearance when Gabriel instructed his father Zachariah that he’d never drink wine. Lk 1.15 This may imply John was to be raised under the Nazirite oath, Nu 6.1-21 which meant he’d never cut his hair. It’s why some art and movies tend to depict him as a really hairy guy. But not all, ’cause the scriptures never flat-out say John never cut his hair.

The other synoptic gospels describe him thisaway:

Mark 1.6 KWL

John is wearing camelhair,

a leather belt round his waist,

eating locusts and bee honey.

Matthew 3.4-5 KWL

4John himself has his clothing made of camelhair,

a leather belt round his waist.

His food is locusts and bee honey.

5Then Jerusalem, all Judea,

and everyone round the Jordan, go out to him

6and are baptized in the Jordan River by him,

confessing their sins.

The camelhair and leather belt had a dual purpose. Firstly they were to remind everyone of Elijah, who also wore clothes made of hair (or had a lot of hair; it could be translated either way) and a leather belt. 2Ki 1.8 Even though John claimed he wasn’t the second coming of Elijah, Jn 1.21 Jesus says he is, Mt 11.14 and the imagery of that mighty prophet certainly got people’s attention. It’s likely what drew people to him: Here’s a sight Israel hadn’t seen for 800 years.

The other purpose was the camelhair meant John, though a priest, wasn’t going to temple. Camels are ritually unclean animals. Lv 11.4, Dt 14.7 I mean, you could own ’em or ride ’em, and many Hebrews did. But not eat ’em, and if you touched them, you couldn’t go to temple unless you washed yourself and your clothes (i.e. got baptized), and waited till sundown. Yet here John was wearing camel. Ritually washing himself and others, but he could never get the camelhair “clean” in a way that permitted him to go to temple. Which meant he could never be called up for temple service like his fellow priests. He could instead spend his time on his ministry.

In case you’re worried, locusts are ritually clean. Lv 11.22 As is μέλι ἄγριον/méli ágrion/“field honey,” which means bee honey—as opposed to date syrup, which Israelis also call “honey.” I’m not sure what a diet of bugs and sugar would do to your teeth; can’t be good. But it did mean John didn’t have to go to town or glean the nearby fields for food.

The original purpose of baptism was to get you ritually clean so you could go to temple. Or, as was Pharisee custom, synagogue. If you’re gonna worship God, be in his presence, you gotta be ritually clean. Now, since we Christians are the Holy Spirit’s temple, 1Co 3.16, 6.19 we no longer need to ritually wash before worship: We can worship him anytime, anywhere, ’cause he’s always here with us. The rules about ritually clean or unclean are moot. Eat as much camel as you want.

But John’s form of baptism was about repenting of our sins: People are to leave behind their former sinful way of life, and return to worshiping God. And what better way to represent this than simple ritual washing? Get baptized. Get forgiven. Be clean.

When we turn to Jesus, we do the very same thing, which is why Jesus adopted baptism for what his followers are to do once we start following him. We Christians added a bunch of qualifications, catechisms, baptism classes, doctrines about how we have to perform a baptism, and so forth. John kept it simple, but we made it far more complicated than it really is, and needs to be. All you need is a repentant heart, and water.

Briefly, about Christian water baptism.

Ritual washing, as the Pharisees and other Jews practiced it, was to walk fully clothed into a pool of water deep enough to cover one’s head; then walk out. Those of the Baptist persuasion have taken this description to nitpick the way we ought to baptize: Full immersion. Not sprinkling, the way some churches do it—a custom they picked up when Christians under persecution couldn’t find sufficient water for immersion, and did what they could with what they had. Those who sprinkle like to point to certain shallow parts of the Jordan and claim John did his baptizing there. I myself have been to the deeper parts of the river, where Baptists and other Evangelicals point out John would have no problem immersing people there. (And they’ll sell you lots of nick-nacks, and rebaptize you if you like.)

Me, I figure Jesus doesn’t give a rip what way we do it. He told us to baptize one another. Mt 28.19 If you can do it in a pool or river, go for it; if you absolutely can’t, I doubt he has any trouble with pouring a bottle of water over someone. If your church prefers the sprinkling method, I believe he counts that as baptism. And we need to stop looking for reasons to snipe at one another.

Now, as for baptizing infants, or people who can’t agree to it (like the Mormon practice of baptizing the dead): Sorta ignores the whole repentance idea. If people aren’t repentant, they don’t want any real relationship with God, and no ritual or sacrament or ordinance will make any change in that. Baptizing your kids doesn’t obligate God to save them. It’s only when they turn to God, when they experience his grace and respond to it, that baptism makes any difference. Might be after the fact, like when a not-quite-believer gets baptized, then later realizes what they got themselves into, and is cool with it; they don’t need to be baptized again, though it won’t hurt ’em if they insist on doing it again “for real.” (If God considers it “for real,” it is.) Without repentance, baptism is dead religion. Stick to living religion.