Reading the Gospels Together Jesus and John the Baptist – Part 6 It is when we turn to the gospel of John that our understanding of John the Baptist become more complicated and more challenging. Clearly John has the same character in mind and is aware of some of the same encounters. Yet there are bold and challenging differences to address as well. John weaves his first mention of John the Baptist into his theological statement regarding Jesus as the God-man. But the emphasis for John is that John the Baptist is a witness rather than a baptist. We would be better to refer to the John introduced to us by the writer of John’s gospel as “John the Witness” than John the Baptist. John is introduced as one who came to testify to the light which is Jesus. John was not the light but a witness to the light. Following his theological beginning John turns to the issue of who John the Witness is. John agrees with the other gospel writers that John the Witness does have a ministry of baptism. And that ministry of baptism leads to questions regarding why John has come to baptize and who John is. The writer of John’s gospel makes it abundantly clear that John the Witness is not the Messiah. But he also proclaims clearly and boldly that John the Witness is not Elijah either, nor is he the Prophet like Moses who was to come. We will recall that Mark, Matthew and Luke had all declared that John the Baptist was in fact Elijah. We are confronted here with a major and irreconcilable difference between John and the other gospel writers. There is no other way to put it than to say that they differ with one another about the identity of John the Baptist. Why does the writer of John’s gospel insist that John the Witness is not Elijah? His reason is that he understands Jesus to Elijah. Jesus is the Messiah. Jesus is the Prophet like Moses. And Jesus is Elijah. All three of these images mean the exact same thing to the writer of John. It is also quite clear that Mark, Matthew, and Luke all believe that to think of Jesus as Elijah is to be guilty of misunderstanding and they all say that quite clearly in their gospels. The only conclusion that is available to us is to realize that followers of Jesus sometimes came to different understandings. That is not a bad thing. In fact it ought to lead us to realize that sometimes we also come to different conclusions than other believers in Jesus. And when that happens it’s not a matter of battling it out to decide who is right and who is wrong but to try our best to understand one another and accept our differences. And, by the way, this is one more piece of evidence that defends the position that each of the gospel writers is responsible for their own writing. The inspiration of God’s Word does not mean that there is no human element involved. God certainly could not have inspired Mark, Matthew and Luke to write that John the Baptist is Elijah and then inspire John to insist that he is not. The inspiration of the Word of God is far more nuanced and complicated than that. And that, in itself, ought to make us more cautious in our use of scripture, especially our use of it as a “proof text” or weapon against those with whom we disagree. So John introduces his readers to John the Witness whose main function is to testify to Jesus. As a witness John is the same voice Mark, Matthew and Luke had mentioned quoting from Isaiah. John can use the same quotation without its further understanding that John is Elijah. John does not use the book of Malachi where the connection to Elijah is more strongly implied. And John does agree with the others that Jesus is the one mightier than John the Witness – the one whose sandal he is not worthy to untie. This statement is the only one that all four gospel writers place on the lips of John. The writer of John’s gospel seems more intent than the others to subjugate John the Witness to Jesus. It is only after the identity of John the Witness has been established that the writer of John’s gospel speaks of the encounter between Jesus and John. And that encounter has nothing to do with baptism. Immediately when John the Witness encounters Jesus he identifies Jesus as the “lamb of God” who takes away the sin of the world. And John goes on to testify that Jesus is mightier than he is. In fact John claims that Jesus is not only mightier than he but that Jesus had also come before he did. The writer of John’s gospel is remembering his theological introduction – the Word was in the beginning with God and was God and the Word became flesh. Identifying Jesus as the “lamb of God” will be important to John. As the “lamb of God” Jesus will die on the day of preparation for the Passover exactly when the lambs to be used in the Passover meal are being slaughtered. And in this encounter John says specifically that he did not know Jesus. Readers of Luke are reminded of Luke’s story and wonder how this can be. Clearly the writer of John’s gospel wants his readers to understand that the encounter between John the Witness and Jesus is the first contact between these two people. So, how does John the Witness know that Jesus is the “lamb of God?” John the Witness testifies that he came baptizing with water for the very purpose that Jesus might be revealed to Israel. And then John goes on to testify that he saw the Spirit descend on Jesus as a dove and that had been the signal to John from God that Jesus was the mightier one. John does not tell his readers that John the Witness baptized Jesus. In fact there is no mention of the baptism of Jesus at all in John’s gospel. It is only because we are familiar with the other three gospels that we assume John the Witness baptized Jesus. Perhaps the gospel of John has a veiled implication that John the Witness baptized Jesus but we could just as likely come to the other assumption which is that he did not. Once again we are reminded of the way in which Luke told the story. We remember that Luke told his readers of the arrest of John the Baptist prior to the baptism of Jesus. Is there something in the traditions that rest behind the gospels that indicate the John did not baptize? Of course we cannot determine that, but reading the gospels together does open new thought for us. At the very least we can presume that the emphasis for the writer of John’s gospel is not on the baptism but rather on the witness of John the Witness that Jesus is and always was the Son of God – in fact the God-man. The writer of John’s gospel goes on to tell of how some of the disciples of John the Witness are led to become disciples of Jesus. As John tells the story it is now the next day – the third day – and John once again identifies Jesus as the “lamb of God” and his audience is his own disciples. They leave John and follow Jesus. And the clear implication within John’s gospel is that they go with John the Witness’ blessing and encouragement. We will talk later about the call of disciples but that story blends together here in our discussion of John the Baptist/Witness. And with that the emphasis in John’s gospel switches from John to Jesus. It is only after Jesus has begun his ministry in Galilee by calling more disciples and attending a wedding at Cana returning to Judea for the Passover which leads to the cleansing of the Temple which is followed by the encounter, presumably in Jerusalem, between Jesus and Nicodemus that John will mention John the Witness again. Readers of Mark, Matthew, and Luke will remember that they tell their readers that John the Baptist had been arrested prior to Jesus first venture to Galilee. In fact, they lead their readers to think that it is the arrest of John the Baptist that motivates Jesus to go to Galilee in the first place. Once again we are confronted with an irreconcilable difference between the synoptic writers and John. This time, when the writer of John’s gospel mentions John the Witness, it is to speak of the competition that has apparently come about between the followers of John the Witness and the followers of Jesus. He tells his readers that Jesus and his disciples have gone into the Judean countryside and are engaged in a ministry of baptism. There is little doubt here from what John says that his readers are to understand that Jesus also is baptizing. John is also in the region and is still engaged in his ministry of baptism. Almost as an aside, the writer of John’s gospel tells his readers that, “of course,” John the Witness had not yet been put in prison. It is almost as if the writer of John knows that his report conflicts with that of the synoptic writers. Of course, it may be that these words are a very late addition to the gospel of John as we have it today to account for that discrepancy. At any rate it is important to note that the writer of John’s gospel is also aware of the imprisonment of John. But the timing of that imprisonment is different from that of the synoptic gospels. Soon readers learn of a potential conflict between Jesus and John the Witness since a report comes to John’s disciples that Jesus is baptizing more people than John. Allegiance to John is transferring to Jesus. Readers of John’s gospel should remember that this transference had already come very early when the disciples of John leave him to become disciples of Jesus – they left with John’s blessing. So here too the main force of the conversation is to highlight the reality that John the Witness is not dismayed by rather pleased that people are leaving him to follow Jesus. John the Witness makes a clear statement – “He must increase and I must decrease.” If there was competition between the disciples of John and those of Jesus at this time or later, the message is clear that Jesus must prevail. At this point the writer of John’s gospel interrupts his narrative with a section of theology that likely fits better with the story of Jesus’ encounter with Nicodemus that had come just prior to the story of Jesus and John baptizing in the same area. After this theological interruption John returns to tell his readers once again that the Pharisees have heard that Jesus is baptizing more disciples than John. Nothing more is made of the observation; however, this time the writer of John’s gospel inserts a denial that Jesus was doing any baptizing. Within a few verses John’s gospel says two contradicting things. When we were examining the storyline of John’s gospel we mentioned these “seams” that open up in John’s narrative. We need to remember what was said then – that these “seams” may well indicate that John’s gospel is a work that grew over time and that sometimes differing information is left side by side. The last time John the Witness is mentioned in John’s gospel is during a time of controversy in Jerusalem between Jesus and the religious authorities there. The authority of Jesus is under attack. John the Witness becomes a defense witness for Jesus. Jesus reminds his opponents that they had sent to John to ask him about his identity and ministry and John the Witness had told them that he was not the Messiah but was sent to bear witness to Jesus who was the Messiah. John is referring back to the very first story he told about John the Witness. And with that the author of John’s gospel will mention John the Witness no more. It is significant that John the Baptist should enter into the controversy between Jesus and the religious authorities in both John and the synoptic gospels. We will look at this Jerusalem Controversy in more detail later but we need to not the connection here.