“So, while these were going away, Jesus began to say to the crowds concerning John. ‘What did you go out into the wilderness to view? A reed shaking by the wind? But what did you go out to see? A man dressed in softness? Behold! Those bearing softness are in the houses of kings. But what did you go out to see? A prophet? Yes, I tell you, and more than a prophet. This is the one about whom it is written: Behold! I certainly send My messenger before you, who will construct your road ahead of you. Truly I say to you, there has not risen among those born of women one greater than John the Baptist. Now, the smallest in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he is. So, from the days of John the Baptist until now, the kingdom of heaven suffers violence and violence snatches it away. For all the Prophets and the Law prophesied until John. And, if you desire to accept it, he is Elijah who is to come. He who has ears, he must Hear!’”
The scene and setting for these verses are virtually unchanged from the encounter with John’s disciples. What we now understand is that there was a crowd present, likely attracted from Jesus’ continued ministry mentioned in v. 1.[1] The implication is that the crowds overheard much of, if not all, the conversation between Jesus and John’s disciples (vv. 3-6). Here Jesus takes the opportunity to confirm the significance of John the Baptist before the eavesdropping crowd. He does so by making two large points: (1) He affirms what the people already know about John (vv. 7-10) and then (2) points out what they obviously missed (vv. 11-15).
Rhetorical Questions: What the People Already Accepted about John (vv. 7-10)
Jesus, the master orator, raises the use of rhetorical questions to an artform. Three times He asks the listening crowds rhetorical questions about John. The first two are somewhat ridiculous yet they pave the way for the third question which Jesus uses as a launching pad to make His point. Each question is pregnant with implications and allusions while together they steadily build to a climax.
Ridiculous Questions: Proving the Point through Antithesis (vv. 7-8)
It is important to Matthew that Jesus’ coming words are understood as taking place even as John’s disciples are departing.[2] For those present, the following words are obviously connected to the preceding conversation. But for the reader, Matthew ensures that the same dots are connected. Turning away from John’s disciples and toward the crowds, Jesus opens with a barrage of rhetorical questions aimed directly at them. These questions probe the crowd as to what they supposed John to be.
Was John a Fickle Weakling? (v. 7b)
“What did you go out into the wilderness to view? A reed shaking by the wind?”
Clearly, Jesus has John the Baptist in mind. As he preached the kingdom and demanded repentance in the wilderness, droves of people came out to him. Why? What did they come out to gawk at?[3] Not waiting for a reply, Jesus provides His first ridiculous answer. A reed shaken by the wind? This ridiculous answer obviously expects a negative response and works on a couple of different levels.
First, a reed is a common enough sight as they grow anywhere that water flows or stands. The banks of the Jordan would be filled with reeds, but so too the shores of the Sea of Galilee. Why go all the way into the Judean wilderness to catch sight of a reed?
Second, we should note that Jesus doesn’t just say “a reed” but that it is a reed “shaking by the wind”.[4] Again, this is a common enough sight, but this added detail seems to imply a more figurative aim. A shaking reed is a common enough image of one who vacillates, wavers, and lacks any real conviction or moral fiber. Was John a quaking coward swayed by the winds of popular opinion or political expediency?
Third, there is a good chance that Jesus here is taking an oblique shot at the man who put John behind bars, Herod Antipas. Not only was Antipas known for his lack of backbone and fickle leadership, but the currency of his realm depicted reeds on one side. The reeds were to (a) indicate fruitfulness and prosperity while (b) advertising his new capital city of Tiberias where reeds grew abundantly.[5]
The question verges on the ridiculous for a reason. By no means would anybody think of John as a vacillating coward blown here and there by random prevailing winds. No one in their right minds would place John and Antipas in the same category. John may have been something of a lightning rod, but he was never a reed.
Was John a Duded Up Dandy? (v. 8)
“But what did you go out to see? A man dressed in softness? Behold! Those bearing softness are in the houses of kings.”
The adversative ἀλλὰ (but) assumes a negative response. The answer to the first question is obviously “no”. Yet, Jesus doesn’t let the crowds off the hook. Then what did you go out to see?[6] The idea of softness (μαλακός) clearly indicates soft clothing due to the context of the participle from αμφιέννυμι (to clothe, dress).[7] The image is that of a dressed up dandy, a dude in duds. The one thing everyone remembers about John the Baptist is the fact that he wore a camel hair garment girded with leather. Clearly, John was not one who clothed himself in soft clothing.
What was said about the reed continues here. A reed shaking in the wind signifies one who bends with the winds of power. Such “yes-men” are usually rewarded and are found trailing along in the wake of those whom they capriciously support dressed in the finery that is expected of such an entourage. The first image flows into the second. But unlike the first question, Jesus provides the answer to this one. There is a slight twist in the wording as Jesus uses a different verb (φορέω) to describe where to find those who bear softness. The term indicates those who carry, bear, or wear something in a habitual manner or for a considerable length of time. These bearers of softness[8] are not found in the wilderness but in the houses of kings.
If the first swipe at Herod Antipas was oblique, this one is certainly more direct. The irony of it all is that John is presently held within one of Herod’s castles or palaces and yet is not dressed nor identified with softness. John is not among the many sycophants who surround Herod. In fact, he alone in Israel stood up to denounce Herod’s public sin (Matt. 14:1-5). Jesus is building a well-established theme of prince vs. prophet. This theme is a well-established pattern throughout the Old Testament with such examples as Moses vs. Pharoah, Samuel vs. Saul, Nathan vs. David, an unnamed man of God vs. Jeroboam, Elijah vs. Ahab, and Jeremiah vs. Zedekiah. Jesus is building up to His point. What did the people go out to see?
Serious Questions: Proving the Point through Prophecy (vv. 9-10)
“But what did you go out to see? A prophet? Yes, I tell you, and more than a prophet. This is the one about whom it is written: Behold! I certainly send My messenger before you, who will construct your road ahead of you.”
The same contrastive ἀλλὰ assumes another negative answer. This time Jesus arrives at the point from which He can launch His explanation of John’s significance: Did y’all go out to see a prophet? You’re darn right you saw a prophet! The one thing that all can agree upon is that John the Baptist was a prophet of God (14:5; 21:26), yet that might be where the agreement stopped. Jesus goes on to claim that John was more than a mere prophet but is in fact the fulfillment of prophecy. John is the prophet of whom the scriptures speak.
Most cross-references in our Bible margins point to Mal. 3:1 as the source of Jesus’ quotation, yet there are also strong connections with Ex. 23:20. The context of Exodus 23 is within the giving of the Mosaic Covenant on Sinai. This is Yhwh’s promise to Moses to send His angel/messenger (ἄγγελος/מַלְאָךְ) ahead of traveling Moses[9] as a guard and guide as Moses leads Israel to the Promised Land. Moses is promised that Yhwh will send someone ahead of him to help lead the nation into rest.
The book of Malachi is one long condemnation of Israel who has returned to the land after the Babylonian exile and yet have apparently learned nothing. The worship of Israel is exposed as being mechanical and technical while ringing hollow and insincere. The spiritual condition of Israel in Malachi’s day is not unlike that of Jesus’. Malachi speaks of a messenger/angel (ἄγγελος/מַלְאָךְ) who will come to prepare the way of Yhwh. In connection with the coming of Yhwh is the coming of the Lord/master (κύριος/אָדוֹן) identified as the one whom Israel seeks. This one will enter His temple. In addition to the Lord is the messenger (ἄγγελος/מַלְאָךְ) of the covenant in whom Israel delights. There are then four parties in play: (1) Yhwh, (2) Yhwh’s messenger in whom Israel also delights, (3) the Lord who is sought and enters his temple, and (4) Israel. The point Malachi is making is that there will be a second exodus in the future. By using such similar language as Exodus, Malachi foresees a coming day when Yhwh will send His messenger to prepare the way before Him when He comes.
Jesus’ use of these texts is most striking for several reasons. First, He clearly identifies John as Yhwh’s messenger (ἄγγελος) and thus as the fulfillment of Malachi 3:1. John comes to prepare the way of Yhwh! This is perfectly in keeping with what Matthew has already said about John (Is. 40:3; Matt. 3:3) and should have been foremost in the minds of those who went out to see him. In this way, John is most certainly more than a mere prophet.
This brings us to our second astounding observation: Jesus identifies Himself as either (1) Yhwh, (2) the Lord whom Israel seeks, (3) Moses, or (4) all three. There is a sense of ambiguity in Malachi as to the identity of the Lord (κύριος/אָדוֹן) whom Israel seeks. Is this one Yhwh or someone else?[10] In addition to this, Jesus uses the second person singular pronouns as are found in Ex. 23:20 but not in Mal. 3:1. Clearly, Jesus uses these second person pronouns to refer to Himself but in Exodus, they are used to indicate Moses. The answer to the question is “yes”. Jesus here announces that He is the manifestation of Yhwh in human flesh, Israel’s Lord, and the second Moses come to teach Israel righteousness.
Jesus is not interested in defending John’s credentials so much as He intends to bring an indictment against the people who were fascinated by John (and Jesus) and yet have now begun to lose interest.[11] If (1) John is the messenger predicted in Malachi of whom the promised angel in Exodus 23 stands as a type, and (2) John proclaimed the coming King and kingdom and publicly identified Jesus as He, then (3) Jesus is the coming manifestation of Yhwh, Israel’s Lord, and second Moses.
This encounter echoes Jesus’ words to His apostles. Those welcome them welcome Him and those who welcome a prophet in the name of a prophet receive a prophet’s reward (10:40-42). And yet, the people of Israel, though fascinated by John, did not welcome him and thus did not welcome Jesus and will not receive a prophet’s reward.
Indicative Statements: John’s Significance in God’s Kingdom Program (vv. 11-15)
With no conjunction or demonstrative pronoun to point us back to v. 10, the “truly” statement in v. 11 begins a new paragraph. Jesus has led His audience right into a logical trap. By first proving that even they reckoned John to be a prophet, Jesus established the connection between John and the promised messenger from Malachi 3:1. This connection has tremendous implications regarding Jesus Himself, but His attention continues to reside on John. Having already established John’s identity Jesus now moves to articulate John’s significance within God’s larger plan of redemption. As He does so, Jesus will create massive implications regarding His own identity and significance.
John’s Ministry the Point of Demarcation (vv. 11-12)
“Truly I say to you, there has not risen among those born of women one greater than John the Baptist. Now, the smallest in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he is. So, from the days of John the Baptist until now, the kingdom of heaven suffers violence and violence snatches it away.”
All of Jesus’ “truly” statements (5:26; 6:2, 5, 16; 8:10; 10:15, 23, 42; 11:11; 16:28; 18:3, 13, 18, 19; 19:23, 28; 21:21, 31; 23:36; 24:2, 34, 47; 25:12, 40, 45; 26:13, 21, 34) are emphatic of their own accord. This is not an allusion, metaphor, or allegory but a plain and serious statement. Simply put, Jesus claims that there has not been a single mortal man greater than John the Baptist. There have been many prophets throughout Israel’s history, all of whom predicted the coming of Yhwh’s Messiah in one way or another. But John alone stood up with a pointed finger and said, “that’s Him!”. Others foresaw the day of Messiah, yet only John prepared the way for Messiah.
While this is an easy enough concept to grasp, the following clause seems somewhat puzzling. How can John be the greatest of all humans born of women and yet be less than the least[12] in the kingdom? The key to understanding is to remain within the context. John’s greatness is not based on privilege (he had none) or person (he was a relatively insignificant person in his own right) but on his function. John’s greatness is attributed to his place as Yhwh’s messenger used to prepare the way of Messiah. In this same sense we understand the superior greatness of the “little” one in the kingdom is based on the fact that he is in the kingdom. Jesus is not depreciating John so much as He is emphasizing the greatness of the coming kingdom.[13] Jesus presents John as the point of demarcation between those who foresaw the kingdom and those who will enjoy the kingdom. As great as John is, those who enjoy the rest found in the kingdom are greater.[14]
John as the point of distinction is made clear in v. 12. The point Jesus makes here is to draw attention to the fact that ever since John’s arrival, God’s kingdom program has been the object of extreme attack. John’s preaching exposed the (1) hypocrisy of Israel’s religious elite (3:7-12) and (2) the wickedness of the Israel’s political leadership (14:1-5). These revelations sent John to prison. If this is true of the forerunner, what will happen to the One whom he went ahead of? Chapter 10 is full of warnings and predictions of opposition to the preaching of the kingdom and here is proof that such oppositions have already commenced. The nearness of the kingdom (as proclaimed by John and Jesus) marks a notable increase in hostility against the kingdom and those who represent it (namely, John and Jesus). The point is this: John was the first step toward something new as he bridges the gap between the Old and New Testaments by paving the way for the Messiah of the New Covenant.
John’s Message the Point of Division (vv. 13-15)
“For all the Prophets and the Law prophesied until John. And, if you desire to accept it, he is Elijah who is to come. He who has ears, he must Hear!”
It is time for an explanation (γὰρ) regarding what Jesus has said. Why is John the point of demarcation? According to v. 13, because the whole of the Old Testament up to John prophesied. The time attested reference of Law and Prophets refers to the totality of Old Testament revelation (5:17; 7:12; 11:13; 22:40; Lk. 16:16; 24:44; Jn. 1:45; Acts 13:15; 24:14; 28:23; Rom. 3:21). What is interesting is that Jesus here (for the first and only time) reverses the order. The emphasis seems to be on the Prophets, more so than the Law (i.e., Torah, the first five books of Moses). This may be due to the fact that the Prophets spent more time and ink anticipating the coming of Messiah and His kingdom than the Law, yet the Law is not without its contributions to Messianic anticipation.[15] Yet, Jesus makes a distinction between the Old Testament anticipation and the message of John. While the prophets of the Old Testament described and anticipated the coming of Messiah, John saw Him, pointed to Him, and anointed Him. John is in a class all unto himself.
In v. 14, Jesus follows this observation up with the punch line. The first-class conditional statement assumes truth for the sake of argument, yet it is still a condition. The protasis (καὶ εἰ θέλετε δέξασθαι) repeats the theme of 10:40-42 in that the audience must desire/will to welcome/accept what Jesus is about to say. Assuming that they accept it, then John is Elijah who is to come. Several things must be understood at this point. First, the reference to Elijah and the expectation that Elijah would accompany Messiah as a forerunner is based on Mal. 4:5: Behold, I am sending to you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the day of Yhwh, the great and fearful. Because the day of Yhwh (יוֹם יְהוָה) is associated with the kingdom (Obad. 15-21) and the coming of Messiah (Ps. 2), this promise of Elijah’s return is assumed to come immediately before the arrival of Messiah.
Second, John is not Elijah. There is no such teaching as reincarnation in Christian or Jewish teaching and so to make John a mere “rebirth” of Elijah opens a slew of unbiblical and heretical notions. John explicitly said that he was not Elijah (Jn. 1:21) and Luke claims that he came in the power and spirit of Elijah (Lk. 1:17), a statement that makes no sense at all if John was in fact the same person as Elijah. In addition to these facts, when Jesus was transfigured on the mount, He was accompanied by two persons: Moses and Elijah (Matt. 17:3). Because Peter, James, and John were witnesses and because all three of them would have known John the Baptist by sight, it is worth noting that they recognized the person in question as Elijah and not John.
Third, John is tightly connected to Elijah. As already mentioned, John was said to come in the same manner as Elijah (Lk. 1:17), dressed in similar fashion as Elijah (Matt. 3:4), and had a similar antagonist as Elijah (fickle king manipulated by an evil woman). While John is most certainly not Elijah, we cannot deny that John was designed to remind people of Elijah.
Fourth, Jesus did not quote Mal. 4:5, but Mal. 3:1. The whole of Jesus’ focus was on the fact that John was the predicted forerunner of Messiah (Himself). Only with this reference to Elijah does the reader begin to connect that idea to Mal. 4:5. Yet, much can be learned be reading Mal. 4:5 in context. The promise of Elijah is to precede the great and terrible day of the Lord. The promise of Elijah is a good thing because it is he who will turn the hearts of Israel to repentance (v. 6) which will place them in the category of those who fear Yhwh’s name (v. 2) as opposed to the chaff that will be set ablaze in that day (v. 1). The conditional statement that Jesus presents assumes that the people accept that John is this same Elijah. If they do, then they will listen to him and repent. Yet, the fact that Jesus has to spell it all out like this indicates that the crowds are not willing to accept this statement, or at least had not accepted it before.
Jesus’ statement in v. 15 may not seem like it, but it is a command to obey.[16] This is not a conclusion formula, for Jesus continues to speak to the crowds in v. 16.[17] Rather, this continues the indictment began in v. 7. This is an order to listen, take to heart, and act upon these words. For a sense of the meaning, review Jesus’ post-resurrection and ascension words to the seven churches (Rev. 2:7, 11, 17, 29; 3:6, 13, 22). Everything hinges on whether the crowds will accept what Jesus said about John or not.
The logic flows like this. (1) John called the people to repent because of the coming kingdom and the judgment that will accompany it (i.e., the day of the Lord). (2) John pointed to Jesus as the one who would bring that judgment. (3) Jesus corrected John’s timetable regarding the coming judgment by assuring John that He was certainly the one to bring it, but also the bringer of blessing. (4) Jesus then admonishes the crowds for not understanding (or caring?) who John was and what place he had in God’s timetable. Jesus exhorts the crowds to do exactly what John commanded them to do: repent. If the nation of Israel accepts this and repents, then the job of Elijah is fulfilled. Yet, the question remains: will Israel repent and welcome Messiah and those who represent Him?
[1] John Nolland, The Gospel of Matthew, The New International Greek Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2005), p. 454.
[2] The demonstrative τούτων has no other antecedent but John’s disciples from vv. 2-6. The present participle πορευομένων (to proceed, leave, depart) communicates contemporaneous time with the aorist indicative ἤρξατο (he began) complemented by the infinitive λέγειν (to say).
[3] Jesus uses the purpose infinitive from θεάομαι (to see, look at, behold). This is not a very common verb in the New Testament (22x) because most writers use the verb ὁράω (to see, catch sight of, notice) with much more frequency (454x). The present term was last used in 6:1 to express how not to practice righteousness (i.e., to be viewed, gawked at by others). The sense implies that the people went into the wilderness to catch the latest show.
[4] The present participle σαλευόμενον describes the reed as shaking rather than shaken. The reed in question is one characterized by his shaking.
[5] David Garland, Reading Matthew: A Literary and Theological Commentary on the First Gospel (New York, NY: The Crossroad Publishing Company, 1993), p. 126.
[6] This time Jesus uses the purpose infinitive from the more common term ὁράω.
[7] Μαλακός can also describe one who is effeminate (1 Cor. 6:9).
[8] The adjective μαλακός is substantival in both instances without an agreeing noun to modify. In the second clause, it is articular (τὰ μαλακά) and thus the object of what is borne. It begs the question whether Jesus means that those who bear soft clothing are found in king’s homes or that those who bear/possess the quality of softness.
[9] The second person pronouns in Malachi are plurals (ὑμεῖς/אַתֶּם) while the second person pronouns in Exodus are singular (σου/ךָ).
[10] Perhaps now we can begin to appreciate John’s question in v. 3.
[11] R. C. H. Lenski, The Interpretation of St. Matthew’s Gospel (Minneapolis, MN: Augsburg Publishing House, 1961), p. 431.
[12] The adjective μικρός carries the same meaning here as it did in 10:42; i.e., the most insignificant of disciples or kingdom citizens.
[13] Leon Morris, The Gospel According to Matthew, The Pillar New Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1992), p. 280.
[14] That is not to say that John (nor any of the Old Testament believers) will not enjoy the kingdom, for they certainly will. The point Jesus is making is to draw a line between the greatness now and the greatness of the coming kingdom. The statement is an implied indictment against the hearers. Will they repent and obey John’s message and thus enter the kingdom (gaining even greater greatness than John on earth)?
[15] In using both Ex. 23:20 and Mal. 3:1, Jesus used the Law and the Prophets as His source to reveal John’s identity.
[16] Ἀκουέτω is a present active imperative and is better translated as “he must hear” rather than “let him hear” to avoid a sense of seeking permission.
[17] Lenski, p. 439.
Comments