With these few details we have to pass over a period of about thirty years which preceded his di-ttSfiJis (cf. Lk 10', Ac I-''), and can only speculate on the question (which is of some interest in reference to Jn 1") whether our Lord was person- ally known to him (as their relationship would seem to necessitate) or not. There can oe little doubt that the elaborate accumulation of dates given by St. Luke (3'-'), combined with the expression (unique in the NT) 'the word of God came,' is meant to mark the beginning of John's ministry, and to emphasize its prophetic character. If (see Chronology of the NT, vol. i. p. 405) we may assign the fifteenth year of Tiberius to A.D. '25-'26, then this is the date of the beginning of John's ministry. We cannot determine how long after this beginning the incident of our Lord's ba|itism occurred, and the arguments used to show that this interval was lon^ (Didon, I.e.) or short (Weiss) are not decisive. The only definite fact to notice is that the first passover of our Lord's ministry (see Chronology of NT, p. 405) is that of A.u. 27, and therefore the baptism must be fixed before that time. To the period following Christ's baptism is to be assigned the carefullj' defined record of Jn l""*-, while the Synootic account belongs to the perioid which precedes that event.
How long an interval elapsed between Christ's baptism and John's imprisonment is the next point to consider. Here it may be noticed (1) that Lk 3"' ■•" mentions the imprisonment before our Lord's baptism, evidently witli the intention of com[iletiiig the references to John before passing to our Lord's ministry ; (2) that Mt I" and Mk 1'* connect our Lord's first journey into Galilee with the imprisonment, and make it lullow that event in time ; (3) that St. John mentions a short stay in (Jalilce and a visit to Jerusalem for the passover, and then makes the delinite statement that 'John was not yet cast into pri.soii' (3-''). We must either assume, therefore, t iiat Jn is at variance with Mt and Mk, or that the visit to Galilee whic-h he records preceded our Lord's public ministry there. The latter is the more probable explanation, and in that ca.so the visit of Ml -V- .ind Sik 1" may \m
678
JOHN THE BAPTIST
JOHN THE BAPTIST
identified with that of Jn 4'. At any rate, for determining the date of the imprisonnient, Jn's Btatementit are more important, for tliat event must liavo been subsequent to the passover of A.I). 27 ! further, if we may press the allusion in Jn 4** — TeTpd^ir]y6i itrriv Kai 6 Btpiap^bi ^pxfrat — onr Lord's journey into Galilee will have taken place not very long after the passover, and if we may also use the statements of Mt and Mk which a-ssign the imprisonment as the reason of our Lord's going into Galilee, then we may li.x the irapri.son- ment early in A.D. 27. One incident is related during that imprisonment (Mt 11^ Lk 7'*), viz. the message sent by John through liis disciples to ask our Lord whether He was the Messiah. This is definitely connected, in St. Matthew's account, with the plucking of the ears of corn ; in St. Luke it seems to be the result of the report of Christ's ministry in Galilee, and especially of the Uaisiiig of the Widow's Son. If, therefore, we follow Mt, this incident would be some time between April and June of the same year ; nor would the latter month allow too little time for the completion of the GaIUa?an tour required by St. Luke's narrative.
The last event to which we have to try and assign a date is the death of John the Baptist, recorded Mt H"-, Mk 6'*»-. Little weight can be attached to the almost universal commemoration of this event on Aug. 29 (Nilles, Kalcnd. Utr. Eccles. ), though it certainly represents a compara- tively early usage. We cannot base any argument on tue context in Mt and Mk, for in both the account is inserted parenthetically to explain Herod's statement that John was ' risen from the dead ' ; but it may be noticed that the news of his death in Mt 14" leads on at once to the miracle of the Feeding of the Five Thousand. Nor can we fix the date of John's death by its coincidence with the yeviaia. of Herod Antipas. Herod's reluctance (Mt 14') to put John to cfeath may, but need not, imply a considerable interval between his imprisonment and death ; thus Renan ( Vh r!e Jis^is, ch. vii.) puts the arrest in the siunmer of 29, and the death on the birthday of Herod Antipas in 30.* We may perhaps safely argue that his death had taken place before the unnamed feast of Jn 5', tor during our Lord's visit to Jerusalem on that occasion he refers to John's ^vitne38 as past (Jn b" ^v) ; and though it is possible to argue that his witness was closed by his imprisonment, it is more natural to refer the expression to his death. John's death therefore took place before the feast of Jn 5', that is, certainly before the second pass- over of our Lord's ministry, but how long before must depend on the interpretation given to Jn 5'. It cannot be placed later than the beginning of A.D. 28. According to tradition (Theodt. HE iii. 3), John was buried at Samaria.