John the Baptist
A Commentary on the Sabbath School Lesson for July 12-18, 2008, “Preparing the Way for Jesus”
John the Baptist (A.A. Iwanow)
“A voice of one calling…prepare the way for the LORD.…” If asked to come up with some key phrases to express our sense of identity and mission, is this the kind of language we might use?
Author Phil Cooke defines a “brand” as something “people think of when they think of you, your product, or your organization.”1 He goes on to quote Wally Olins, the chairman of Saffron Brand Consultants:
[I]n a world that is bewildering in terms of competitive clamor, in which rational choice has become almost impossible, brands represent clarity, reassurance, consistency, status, membership-everything that enables human beings to help define themselves. Brands represent identity.2
This quote makes a person wonder what the “John the Baptist” brand represents. What does an identity described simply as “a voice” communicate? What about a mission statement that is not about establishing and protecting our own concerns? Who would be interested? What might the service or product look like?
As I think about Isaiah’s description of John’s ministry, my mind drifts back to the 1970s, when, as a young person still new to Adventism, I listened to the Voice of Prophecy radio program. Each broadcast began with the King’s Heralds quartet singing, “Lift up the trumpet and loud let it ring, Jesus is Coming Again.” At the appropriate moment, their voices would fade long enough for H.M.S. Richards Jr. to deliver a line that described the Voice of Prophecy’s ministry as “a voice calling out in the wilderness of these modern times, ‘Prepare the way of the Lord.’”
This was clearly an attempt to link the program’s identity and mission (as well as that of the Adventist Church in general) with that of John the Baptist. It is less clear whether or not the “John the Baptist brand” has always been at the heart of our concern about preserving the church’s identity and mission.
What if it were? What if we considered thoughtfully what it might mean, both personally and corporately, to assume the “John the Baptist” brand? Where might that train of thought lead?
As counterintuitive as it might seem, perhaps one of the first steps in exploring these questions might be to ponder not being the center of our own brand. We glimpse one possible answer as we watch John respond to those who pressed him to define his ministry in terms mostly about himself.
Now this was John’s testimony when the Jews of Jerusalem sent priests and Levites to ask him who he was. He did not fail to confess, but confessed freely, “I am not the Christ.” They asked him, “Then who are you? Are you Elijah?” He said, I am not.” “Are you the Prophet?” He answered, “No.” Finally they said, “Who are you? Give us an answer to take back to those who sent us. What do you say about yourself?” John replied in the words of Isaiah the prophet, “I am the voice of one calling in the desert, make straight the way for the Lord.” (John 1:19–23 NIV)
We should not allow the unassuming nature of John’s response to mask its significance. John seemed to grasp that his ministry was not an end in itself, even if those who responded to his message did not. His mission was not to establish a group of people who had a unique “John the Baptist” identity. Rather, it was wrapped up in the task of pointing others to Jesus and preparing them to embrace a kingdom bigger than the movement he lead. However much those who followed him appreciated, or were shaped and blessed by his ministry, he would have been the first to point out the mistake of tying one’s primary identity to him or the movement itself, rather than to Jesus.
You yourselves can testify that I said, I am not the Christ but am sent ahead of him. The bride belongs to the bridegroom. The friend who attends the bridegroom waits and listens for him, and is full of joy when he hears the bridegroom’s voice. That joy is mine, and it is now completed. He must become greater; I must become less. (John 3:28–30 NIV)
What might it mean for Adventism to see itself less as the entity that people are called to join, and more as the friend of the bridegroom? Would taking this possibility seriously provide us with a more modest vision of the “remnant,” individually and corporately? Could we see it instead being comprised of scattered bits and pieces apparently left over, which gain their identity seeing themselves as part of a whole much bigger than themselves? Something to ponder!
The uniqueness of John’s message itself is as important as the way it was framed. For example, John invited his hearers (Jews and Gentiles alike) to consider carefully whether the ways in which they lived corresponded to those of God. According to John, the new kingdom is one in which people are defined less by nationality, pedigree, or theological purity, than by the justice and genuineness of their lives and the way they interact with each other. With the Kingdom of God on the verge of establishment, the people of John’s time had the opportunity to change course, repent, and embrace a new life.
Furthermore, John invited people to celebrate and express their decision through what appeared to be the new and innovative practice of baptism.
It’s not unreasonable to assume that people from the first century had some familiarity with baptismal imagery. In Babylon, the cult of Enki employed water ritually, and the Egyptians used it to remove blemishes from newborn children and prepare their dead for the afterlife. Other ancient religions used baptismal-like practices as initiation rites, which carried connotations of purification, regeneration, transformation, the reception of a special knowledge, and so forth.3 Sometime during the time of the exile, Jews also apparently developed a practice closely associated with purification rites for converts to Judaism.4
Thus, it appears that John and Jesus adapted ways that were known, and they infused them with unique Christian meanings when they invited people to be baptized. Perhaps they did this as a way to help hearers understand and celebrate what it meant to become a part of the Kingdom. Just as they issued a clear call to disengage from ways contrary to the life of that Kingdom (repent), John and Jesus also showed willingness to engage thought patterns in their culture. By adapting, changing, and infusing them with new meaning, they provided ways to understand more fully and embrace the message of the Kingdom.5 The voice that cried out in the wilderness had the ring of authenticity, yet it also showed willingness to be innovative in finding meaningful ways to redirect and infuse cultural patterns.
Perhaps one of the most troubling aspects of John the Baptist’s brand was that not everybody received it well. John was arrested, struggled with questions of his own, and was ultimately executed. This raised questions among many about his ministry. However, Jesus declared, “Among those born of women there has not risen anyone greater than John the Baptist,” which reminds us that we need to be careful about how we measure significance and success (Matt. 11:11). Whether or not the movement John started continued to flourish under its own identity was not as important as whether it accomplished the purpose for which it had started.
These are some of the thoughts I have after reflecting upon the meaning of taking the “John the Baptist brand” seriously. For those who still consider themselves part of the voice calling out in these modern times, “Prepare the way of the Lord,” they are still worth pondering!
Notes and References
1. Phil Cooke, Branding Faith: Why Some Churches and Nonprofits Impact Culture and Others Don’t (Ventura, California: Gospel Light, 2007), 11.
2. Ibid., 38.
3. Encyclopedia of Religion, 2d ed., s.v. “Baptism,” by Michel Meslin, 779–80.
4. See Wayne A. Meeks, The First Urban Christians: The Social World of the Apostle Paul (London: Yale University Press, 1983), 153.
5. The writings of Paul also reflect ways in which cultural imagery continued to be used to expand and explain the meaning of baptism. One example is the concept of being clothed in Christ (Gal. 3:27), which may draw from the toga virilis ceremony. See J. Albert Harrill, “Coming of Age and Putting on Christ: The Toga Virilis Ceremony, Its Paraenesis, and Paul’s Interpretation of Baptism in Galatians, “ Novum Testamentum 44, no. 3 (2002): 253–56.
Ken Curtis is an associate pastor at the Calimesa, California, Seventh-day Adventist Church.
Search
- Nic Samojluk on Describing Desmond Ford's Faith
- Bob Helm on Describing Desmond Ford's Faith
- Bob Helm on Anglican Apology to Darwin an Example for Adventists
- Michael on Survivalist Eschatology
- orthodoxymoron on Survivalist Eschatology
- orthodoxymoron on Survivalist Eschatology
- Tihomir Kukolja on Spectrum Live Blog: US Presidential Debate This Evening
- Alexander Carpenter on Survivalist Eschatology
- Tom Zwemer on Survivalist Eschatology
- Carlitas on Spectrum Live Blog: US Presidential Debate This Evening
User login
© Copyright 2008 Adventist Forums 
Comments
I enjoyed this blogger's commentary on the lesson.
http://alaska-kubo.blogspot.com/2008/07/missionaries-prophet-is-not-miss...
I did too.
"Whether or not the movement John started continued to flourish under its own identity was not as important as whether it accomplished the purpose for which it had started."
Nice comment. How does this relate to Adventism and whether we fulfill our purpose? If we don't could God move on to impower other groups? Has this happened already and we are deluding ourselves to our 'specialness'?
Did I miss in this and the alaska-kubo that it was a message of repentance for the forgiveness of sins?
The most thought-provoking and poignant ponderables for me were in these questions from Ken Curtis:
"What might it mean for Adventism to see itself less as the entity that people are called to join, and more as the friend of the bridegroom? Would taking this possibility seriously provide us with a more modest vision of the “remnant,” individually and corporately? Could we see it instead being comprised of scattered bits and pieces apparently left over, which gain their identity seeing themselves as part of a whole much bigger than themselves?"
This emphasis on the idea that we as Adventists are not "it" as a movement or a people, but rather that we are a part of the "it" called to point attention not to ourselves but to the real "it" is both a refreshing perspective and a challenging one.
This commentary reminds me of how we in Adventist Christianity have sometimes tended to Advertise ourselves as the special end-time people brought into existence by God to trumpet a particular (and unique to us) doctrinal understanding. I appreciate the shift from the centrality of us to the centrality of Jesus. That de-centering (as Julius Nam put it) movement certainly seems to have been the primary concern for John.
And yes, there was a sense in which repentance and forgiveness played a part. Repentance seemed to function as something that prepared people for Jesus, but it was not an end in itself.
Jared,
You are correct that repentance is never an end in itself. It is an acknowledgement of one's sinfulness and need of grace and forgiveness.
Repentance is against our prideful nature and we recognize that it then requires a response to the one offering grace. To that we chafe. That means we are not completely "free" but responsible to the one that saves.
regards,
pat
A provocative timely commentary adapted to a contemporary movement that is bound to exploit technology and glitter to the expense of content and focus. The ugly American is becoming irrelevant in large parts of the world field. Dispensationalists have captured the triumphalistic platform.
Now is the time to revert to the task given us: "Ye are my witnesses". Just as John did, let us cry out: "Behold the Lamh of God which taketh away the sin of the world!" Salvation is not in what you know but in whom you believe. That is why Amazing Facts is old hat. Now is the time for Amazing Grace. Let us tell the story of what Jesus did not what He is doing as a dusty old archivist. If God can keep track of billions and billions of Galaxies on a day to day, moment to moment basis, He doesmn't need more than 154 years to keep track of us. Maybe, we old has beens should just fold our tents and just silently fade away. We would gladly if there were an Edward Heppenstall on the world stage right now. Certainly Paulsen has the background and talent, what's holding him back--there really isn't another term for him, under any circumstances. There will be no better time. Tom
I also found Mark's comments at alaska-kubo very helpful. But couldn't help "defending" myself [insert smile here], so wrote:
Hi Mark:
Thanks for your thoughtful perspective. I'm sorry you thought the lesson might leave people thinking we should mimic John the Baptist's exact message and delivery. I would hope that the first two lessons would suggest that wasn't my intent--we must adapt our message and methods to circumstances.
I do think we need to speak prophetically--against injustice, for the poor and marginalized, against greed and materialism, against the alcohol industry etc.
In the chapter on John the Baptist in the companion book to these lessons, I mention a Washington Post article from a few years ago that mentioned in passing that the Adventist Church was considered "a little subversive" and the presence of its headquarters added to Takoma Park's "progressive reputation."
And I think subversive is a good word for people who see themselves in the Elijah and John the Baptist prophetic tradition.
But today, at least in the West, we're about as subversive as Marines on parade. (We're about as far from John the Baptist as you can get--middle-class, private-school educated, living in the suburbs, good neighbors, and we keep tidy lawns.)
But historically, it's true--we were subversive. On health reform, attitudes to war, views on slavery, to name just a few. We even subverted women's clothes. Ellen White was a kind of anti-fashion designer of the reform dress--a more practical and healthful alternative to the foolish fashions women were trying to squeeze into.
But I think we're losing our prophetic voice. We need to find it again, but exercise it in a compassionate way.
Excuse me for quoting myself, but I write:
"The Christian message is ultimately subversive--'This world is not my home.' And the Adventist message is an Elijah message. It's a John the Baptism message. But while we're still here, strangers in a strange land, Jesus has instructed us to be 'wise as serpents, and harmless as doves" (Matthew 10:16, KJV). A truly Christian subversion is wise and loving. An authentic prophetic voice is both critical and compassionate.
"Although John the Baptist didn't hire a public-relations firm to give his message a positive spin, there's no virtue in stirring up animosity. At times Adventist aggression has lost us friends. At times, too, doctrinal snobbery has alienated our neighbors. Love must motivate all we do. The early Christian church was subversive, yet it enjoyed 'the favor of all the people' (Acts 2:44-47). At least for a while."
Best wishes
Gary Krause
Ken:
Thanks for a very helpful perspective on John the Baptist.
Gary
Gary,
I appreciate your clarifications. It's too bad that material wasn't in the lesson proper and prevented misunderstandings (or misdirected focus) like I got.
I didn't expect my personal thinking out-loud to be picked up here.
Anyway, appreciate your response.
Mark
I like what Paul said:
"We do not preach ourselves, but; we preach Christ Jesus, and ourselves your servants for his sake."
Somehow, I often feel the denominational emphasis of remnant church as organization/institution seems to lose the simple balance and focus of this equation.
Thanks...
Frank
hi
someone would be able to answer,why john has changed the
circumcision to the baptism?
laercio
Laercio
Most, if not all, the males that John baptized had been circumcised, including Jesus.
I think Scriptures bear out that it was Paul who states that circumcision availeth nothing.
Tom
The Sabbath School lesson teaches that John the Baptist came in the "spirit of Elijah", but did he preach the Message of Elijah? May I suggest that perhaps he missed it?
The message of Elijah is outlined in Malachi 4:5,6 and I Kings 18:37. Where these two passages repeat the same theme- that God is the One that initiates reconciliation-seems to be the Elijah message, the characteristic of God that sets Him apart from Baal (and all other man-made religious paradigms). This proactive self-sacrificing love- exemplified by the cross-is how God differs from all other gods.
But John the Baptist, aside from his social ethics, only characterizes the ministry of the Messiah in two spots. And neither of them mention this theme. They emphasize power and judgment instead. I do not mean to detract from John's amazing ministry, humility, popularity and self-sacrifice.
But perhaps, this is why John was open to disillusion and doubt while in prison- because he did not understand this reconciliatory/one-ness characterization of the Messiah's mission- the one that Jesus demonstrated to John's disciples in healing and preaching to the poor as an answer to the doubts.
As to the John the Baptist "brand", he did fail a tiny bit- if John's mission was to prepare the people for Jesus then every disciple that remained John's even while the disciples of Jesus were baptizing too and actively recruiting, every disciple that remained with the imprisoned John and asked Jesus for verification of His Messiahship, and the crowds that did not immediately turn and follow Jesus when John proclaimed Jesus, "Behold, the Lamb of God that takes away the sin of the world!" in public- shows that the John "branding" was a distraction from following Jesus.
A true friend of the bridegroom would not want to distract the "bride" from her husband, would they? Why didn't John completely and directly turn into Jesus' disciple himself and bring the whole crowd with him? (even Hiliary did that.)
In response to Arlyn's comments, I think it would be fair to say that there was much about Jesus and His mission that John the Baptist did not fully grasp, which may be a helpful perspective in itself. In reality, I think for most all of us today, and for characters mentioned in scripture, spiritual life can often be messy, uneven, and certainly incomplete in many ways. We are all works in progress, as was John the Baptist. Further, there were a lot of things about the ministry of Jesus at this point that were still not entirely in focus, particularly for a group of people who had a different set of messianic expectations than we do now in retrospect. Even the disciples of Jesus did not fully grasp the implications of His ministry until after the resurrection weekend, and even then, it took them awhile to fully appreciate many of the implications that seem more obvious to us now (Think of Peter, the vision on the roof, and the struggle to realize that gentiles are fully included too).
But even aside from that, John simply may not have been able to control the response of his own followers, even though he seems pretty consistent in pointing them away from himself toward Jesus, and seeking to take the friend of the bridegroom role. This may have been less John's issue as it was an issue for those who may have insisted on framing his ministry in a way that he resisted.
Because John's ministry (and life) came to an end before John had fully worked out all the details about Jesus himself, or perhaps as they were just coming into focus for him, we don't know what might have happened had he lived on. Perhaps, Arlyn, what you suggest John should have done is what he very well may have done had he lived longer? My instinct is to not be too hard on John here, especially since much of what he would have needed to work all the details out may not have been clear until later on down the road a bit.
Post new comment