The scene of John's ministry will be placed
Eartly in the desert of Judsea (Mt 3'), in which it egan, and partly in the Jordan Valley, and more definitely near tne fords (Bethabara [which see] = ' place of crossing over'), either those in the neigh- bourhood of Bethshean or those in the neighbour- hood of Jericho. Two places are mentioned in connexion with his 'baptism,' viz. Bethany or Bethabara (Jn 1**), and vEnon near toSalim (Jn 3^), probably in the neighbourhood of Bethshean. From Jn 3*", and also from the fact of his coming under the jurisdiction of Herod Antipas, we infer that he probably spent some time in Periea.
iii. John's ^Vork and Teaching.— (a) The name 6 /Saimirr^s or 6 ^airTl^wv (whether given to him to distinguish him from others of the same name or not) indicates the feature of his work whiih attracted special attention. It was used of him
• These dat*8 are, of course, later than those in the article oe CuaoMOLOQY OF NT, which is here followed.
during his lifetime by his disciples (Lk 7*), and that the term is not due to the evangelist is clear from Lk 3'^ 7" etc., where John is by him called sou of Zacharias, or simj)ly John. The term is used of him al.so during his lifetime by our Lord (Mt ll")i who, however, also uses the name John siinjily (c.n. Mt 11"), by Herodias (Mt 14"), by Herod utter John's death (Mt 14^), and by the evangelists Mt and Mk but not Lk and Jn. In regard to hia baptism, we gather that his right to perform the ceremony was questioned, inasmuch as (Jn 1") it was connected, according to Jewish ideas, only with the Messiah (cf. Ezk 36^, Zee 13' etc.), with Klias as His forerunner, and with 'the prophet' (i.e. of Dt 18'°). John speaks of himself as having received a special commission from God to baptize (Jn f ), though this is not spoken of in the angel'a message to Zacharias, and he seems (Jn 3'-'') to de- fend our Lord's baptism (Jn 3-", but cf. 4'^) by basing it on a similar divine commission. The import of the rite was early a question of discussion (Jn 3*°), nor does the language of the evangelists make clear what was understood by it ; for while Mk 1* Lk 3' define it as 'a baptism of repentance for remission of sins,' Mt 3" speaks of it as a baptism (1% (Tr)v) licravoiav ; but iierivoia can hardly have been the object of the rite, for it was preceded (Mt, Mk) by a confession of sin The submission of a Jew to the rite was, so far, an act involving iirrivoia, in that it implied that he put himself in the same position towards the coming ^aaCKtia tCiv ovpav^r which the proselj'te took up towards the old Jewish dispensation ; it implied tliat he rested no longer on his privileged position as a Jew, but realized his individual responsibility in regard to sin. This comes near to Sabatier's explanation (.see Lit. below) of the rite as ' consecrating a new Israel,' and would perhaps best explain the meaning of our Lord's words, in regard to Himself, th.at a sub- mission to John's baptism was (Mt 3'°) a fulfilment, i.e. a complete realization, of what was meant by 5i/tato<rw>;, as something which consisted not merely in external rites, but involved moral claims. Our Lord irajjlies tliat John's baptism was from heaven (Mk U*'); and the refusal of the Pharisees and lawyers to receive it is in itself a virtual rejection of God's purpose, while the acceptance of it by the publicans and the people showed a truer recognition on their part of what the righteousness of God really jmeant (Lk "J^-^ ioiKaluaav rbv Btliv). We may notice, too (Mt 21*^), that our Lord regards John as coming iv 65i^ SLKaiojOvrjs. So that we may regard Joliu's baptism as emphasizing the true nature of diKaioaOi'Tj.
(/3) We pass from his baptism to (1) his position as a teacher ; (2) the language in which that teaching was conveyed ; (3) its underlying ideas.
(1) The angel Gabriel connects with him (Lk 1") the prophecy of Malachi (4'- *), but precludes the idea that l!lias would return in person as many exiiected (see Geux, I.e. p. 73 fl'.), by saying that John should come in 'the spirit and power' of Klias. That he was Elias come in the flesh John himself (Jn 1-') denied, while Christ atlirmed that John the Baptist was really the Elias who was to precede the Messiah's coming (Mt IV 17"""). The other propliecy which was applied to .lolin the liiqitist by himself (Jn 1") and .also by the evange- lists (Mt 3^ Mk 1=) is that of Is 40'. He was then ' more than a prophet,' as himself the sul.>ject of prophecy. But he was also essentially a propliet, and as such St. Luke introduces him in the unique expression already noticed, as such Zach.arias refers to him (Lk I"' Tpo(f,-fiT-ris "t^pLarov KX-riBnari), as such Christ regarded him (Mt 11"), and the people as a rule (but cf. Mt 11'*) accepted him as a prophet (Mt 14' 21"). In regard to his special mission we must refer also to the words used of him in Jn 1' 3^
JOHX THE BAPTIST