This will be the third posting for the discussion I am presently having with a young man by the name of Arthur. He holds to a teaching that considers the ministry of John the Baptist a failure, and that because John failed to prepare a people for Jesus, Jesus had to go to the cross. Our discussion began HERE, and I have posted my replies in the form of blog postings HERE, HERE and in this posting as well. I will put Arthur’s words in this discussion in bold italic, so that no one will confuse his words with my reply. In my earlier reply I made the statement that when asked whether or not he was literally Elijah, John replied he was not. Arthur responded with:
I know that John was not the ‘literal’ Elijah of 900yrs earlier. The Jewish people were not asking John if he was the literal Elijah. Malachi had said that Elijah MUST come before the Messiah, John was dressed as Elijah, saying the same words as Elijah, and had testified to Jesus at the river Jordon, it was a natural question for them to ask if John were that Elijah.
…The Jewish people were asking John if he was the fulfillment of Malachi. Not if he were the actual literal Elijah.
Well this is not the understanding of the speaker in the video[1] on your website. He says about 5 to 10 minutes into his lecture: “…Hey, Zach, get it? Elijah, your son is the Elijah! Now, according to the traditional belief, of which Zechariah was certainly an arbiter of that belief as a chief priest. Their expectation was that the literal prophet Elijah would return out of the sky, and that would be the sign of Christ’s coming.”
His understanding also agrees with what I have been able to find about the Jewish beliefs of that period: “that in the second year of Ahaziah, Elias was hid; nor will he appear, till the Messiah comes; then he will appear, and will be hid a second time; and then will not appear, till Gog and Magog come.” [Seder Olam Rabba, p. 45, 46]
In my opinion when John was asked if he were Elijah (John 1:21), he responded according to the intent of their question. If they mistakenly understood a literal interpretation of Malachi 4:5, as seems to be the case according to the Seder Olam Rabba quotation above, then John should have denied he was that Elijah. John and Elijah the Tishbite were two different people. Therefore, the doctrine that John the Baptist was confused about his calling is a false doctrine. The teaching that John the Baptist was a failure at his ministry is also a false doctrine, because he was great in the sight of the Lord, according to the Scriptures, and Jesus had only praise for him. As far as I am concerned, the gentleman in the video is confused about John, his ministry and its value in the sight of God.
Smoodock's Blog 
21 responses to “Was John the Baptist Literally Elijah?”
Greetings Arthur,
Concerning Luke 7:28…
To be more accurate, Jesus is implying that John is lower than the least in the kingdom.
We are at a bit of an impasse here. I’ll try to approach it differently. Suppose you lived in London. And a store truthfully advertised that they were selling computers lower than any other store in London. Their prices were the ‘least’ you could find anywhere else in London. No matter where you went in London you found everyone else’s prices were ‘greater’ than those in this particular store—same brand of computers, same everything except for the price. Nevertheless, you bought your own computer on the same day for a price lower than what the store in London was advertising. Assuming everything above is true, could you have bought your computer in London?
Jesus said of John, that even the least in the kingdom are GREATER than John. Quite strange, considering that John was the greatest ever born!!
I wonder, then, if you are applying Jesus statement correctly. How could Jesus praise John, saying no prophet was greater than John, but those commandment breakers over there who teach falsely—they—are greater than John who is among the greatest of prophets?
Concerning John 1:21…
No, John did NOT say ‘who they were looking for’, he did say, he was not the Elijah; Full stop.
If we are going to be ‘technical’ then let’s be ‘technical’. John was asked a question, and the text says John’s reply was “I am not.” He didn’t say: “I am not Elijah.” John said, “I am not.” To find out what John meant by, “I am not.” We must understand what he was asked. Who were John’s interrogators, and what was their question? According to John 1:24, John’s interrogators were Pharisees. They were not Jesus, for example. They were the same people John elsewhere called a generation of vipers (Matthew 3:7). So, what did these ‘vipers’ ask John? They asked: “Are you Elijah?” (John 1:21). Should John say “I am” or should he say: “I am not”?
If John says “I am”, wouldn’t it be deceitful? After all, all of us are on record (you, me and the guy in the video) as saying these men believed Elijah had never died and was to come again out of the sky on a chariot. They expected a miracle worker like the first Elijah, but John didn’t perform any miracles. If John answered their question “I am”, would he be telling the truth?
I will phrase it another way. What if Jesus asked John, “Are you Elijah?” would he have been asking the same question as these Pharisees in John 1:21? The words are the same, but would those words represent the same query?
Concerning Gabriel’s message to Zechariah…
“…for he will be great in the sight of the Lord. He must never drink wine or strong drink, and he will be filled with the Holy Spirit, even before his birth. He will turn many of the people of Israel to the Lord their God. And he will go as forerunner before the Lord in the spirit and power of Elijah, to turn the hearts of the fathers back to their children and the disobedient to the wisdom of the just, to make ready for the Lord a people prepared for him.” (Luke 1:15-17 NET.)
“for he will be great in the sight of the Lord…” – was this fulfilled in John’s life, or is this a false prophecy?
“He will turn many of the people of Israel to the Lord their God…” – was this fulfilled in John’s life, or is this a false prophecy?
“…he will go as a forerunner before the Lord in the spirit and power of Elijah…” was this fulfilled in John’s life, or is this a false prophecy?
Either John did as Gabriel said he would do, or Gabriel is a false messenger of God.
Nowhere in Luke 7:28 does the scripture say, that John is ‘outside the kingdom’.
Where does it say in this same verse that John is ‘inside’ the Kingdom?
You are making an assumption, based upon your existing beliefs.
Oh, pardon me. I didn’t realize I was the only one doing this.
Jesus, can be saying those things, because the least in heaven ARE greater than John because of his failure.
Where does it say in Luke 7 that John failed? In all of chapter 7 Jesus has nothing but praise for John, and he admonishes the leaders of the Jews for not believing him (John).
I’m stating, that Jesus is calling John lower than the least as further evidence that John failed in his mission, which was to prepare a PEOPLE for the Messiah.
“And he will go as forerunner before the Lord in the spirit and power of Elijah, to turn the hearts of the fathers back to their children and the disobedient to the wisdom of the just, to make ready for the Lord a people prepared for him.” (Luke 1:17 NET.)
Well, I would have to conclude that either your statement or Gabriel’s prophecy is totally wrong. One may be correct, but it is logically impossible for both to be correct.
Concerning Luke 7:28 and John’s position…
If the scriptures we are discussing are as you say, concerning ‘outside the kingdom’, (from that viewpoint, EVERYBODY (including Jesus) is ‘outside the kingdom’, why does Jesus single out just John?
At this particular time, Jesus alone is in the Kingdom. The Kingdom is within you (Luke 17:21). No other person could have been in the Kingdom of God until after Pentecost. This is when the Holy Spirit came down and began to dwell ‘within’ men who believed. This is the Gospel of the Kingdom of God that Jesus preached. God is to reign in our hearts. If he reigns there, we won’t have to be forced to do God’s will; fulfilling his will would be our greatest desire. This was Jesus’ greatest desire; it was the very food for his Spirit (John 4:34).
Concerning Luke 7:28 as it is compared with Matthew 5:19…
This is going to come across as very rude, believe me, I do not wish to be rude, but I do have to ask. If John is ‘not as great’ as the commandment breakers, is this not the same as saying, the breakers of Gods commandments are greater than John? In other words, people who break God’s commandments are greater than John? Which implies that they are greater than John because John broke even bigger or more commandments than they did.
You are not rude—nothing is rude here.
As I pointed out above when you asked why Jesus was singling out John, at the time of Jesus’ statement, only Jesus was in the Kingdom of God—(Luke 17:21), because the Holy Spirit was not yet given to man (John 7:39). Jesus was speaking of what it would be like in the future. There would be those in the Kingdom of God who, though they had faith in Jesus, would ignorantly teach wrong doctrines—not everything they taught, but some things. These would be ‘least’ in the Kingdom of God. John the Baptist was a great prophet—none greater than he, yet the type of life of even the ‘least’ in the Kingdom would have been greater than that of John’s. Why, because even the ‘least’ would be a Temple of the Presence of God. God would dwell within all—from the ‘least’ to the ‘greatest’ in the Kingdom. Nevertheless, at the time of Jesus speaking in Luke 7:28, no one but Jesus was in that Kingdom.
I shall post that further evidence, directly after posting this page. You can reply or ignore as you see fit. But it will (I think) help clarify why I believe as I do.
Normally, I neither post nor reply to a cut and paste. However, I’ll read what you have posted and consider replying to it. If I decide to reply, I’ll approve the ‘cut and paste’ comment, and reply beneath it, like I would any other comment.
Lord bless,
Eddie.
Hi Eddie
Quote from Eddie
“We are at a bit of an impasse here. I’ll try to approach it differently. Suppose you lived in London. And a store truthfully advertised that they were selling computers lower than any other store in London. Their prices were the ‘least’ you could find anywhere else in London. No matter where you went in London you found everyone else’s prices were ‘greater’ than those in this particular store—same brand of computers, same everything except for the price. Nevertheless, you bought your own computer on the same day for a price lower than what the store in London was advertising. Assuming everything above is true, could you have bought your computer in London?”
I like your analogy, but it does not quite work. Using your above analogy the purchaser is either wrong or is lying. As the reality of this discussion, is being based on the words of Jesus…
Quote from Eddie
“I wonder, then, if you are applying Jesus statement correctly. How could Jesus praise John, saying no prophet was greater than John, but those commandment breakers over there who teach falsely—they—are greater than John who is among the greatest of prophets?”
Jesus would be correct to say this “IF” John did not fulfill that for which he had been born to do. The fact that Malachi say’s “Lest I smite the land with a curse”, clearly shows that there existed the possibility of something happening that was not God’s wishes.
Looking at the past 2000yrs of the Jewish history, would you conclude that their history had been blessed or cursed?
Their history was not intended to be a cursed history. “LEST, I smite the land…”
In the sense of mission, John Was the greatest one, but in attending Jesus as the Messiah, he was the least one because he did not follow Him and serve Him as the Messiah as God had intended.
Quote from Eddie
“If we are going to be ‘technical’ then let’s be ‘technical’. John was asked a question, and the text says John’s reply was “I am not.” He didn’t say: “I am not Elijah.” John said, “I am not.” To find out what John meant by, “I am not.” We must understand what he was asked. Who were John’s interrogators, and what was their question? According to John 1:24, John’s interrogators were Pharisees. They were not Jesus, for example. They were the same people John elsewhere called a generation of vipers (Matthew 3:7). So, what did these ‘vipers’ ask John? They asked: “Are you Elijah?” (John 1:21). Should John say “I am” or should he say: “I am not”?
Such a long explanation to explain what John meant, when asked if he were the Elijah?
Are you the Elijah? I am not. Forgive me for misquoting by saying John said “I am not Elijah”
Quote continued
If John says “I am”, wouldn’t it be deceitful? After all, all of us are on record (you, me and the guy in the video) as saying these men believed Elijah had never died and was to come again out of the sky on a chariot. They expected a miracle worker like the first Elijah, but John didn’t perform any miracles. If John answered their question “I am”, would he be telling the truth?
I will phrase it another way.”
Was Jesus also being deceitful, when He said?…
Mathew 11:14
And if ye will receive it, this is Elias, which was for to come.
Quote continued
“What if Jesus asked John, “Are you Elijah?” would he have been asking the same question as these Pharisees in John 1:21? The words are the same, but would those words represent the same query? “
Jesus would not have asked, for He already knew the answer. Also Jesus was answering this very question posed by the Pharasees as it was brought to him from his disciples, when it was asked of them.
Quote from Eddie
“for he will be great in the sight of the Lord…” – was this fulfilled in John’s life, or is this a false prophecy?”
Not a false prophecy “IF” John was successful. John was not a robot, he had free will, he could do, or not do.
The last words of Malachi clearly show a possible outcome not desired by God, “LEST”, I come and smite the earth with a curse.””
Quote from Eddie
“He will turn many of the people of Israel to the Lord their God…” – was this fulfilled in John’s life, or is this a false prophecy?”
I have posted to you, the ‘actual’ accomplishments of John’s ministry, according to the accounts of the gospels. Exactly how many people did John turn to Jesus, according to the gospels?
Quote from Eddie
“…he will go as a forerunner before the Lord in the spirit and power of Elijah…” was this fulfilled in John’s life, or is this a false prophecy?
John 1:20
And they asked him, What then? Art thou Elias? And he saith, I am not. Art thou that prophet? And he answered, No.
Quote from Eddie
“Either John did as Gabriel said he would do, or Gabriel is a false messenger of God.”
Or John failed to do what Gabriel said he would do, and Gabriel was a true messenger.
Quote from Eddie
“Where does it say in this same verse that John is ‘inside’ the Kingdom?”
Are you asking me to show you something, which I never said? I at no time said that “John is inside the Kingdom”
Quote from Eddie
“Oh, pardon me. I didn’t realize I was the only one doing this.”
If that is what I’m doing, then I apologize.
Quote from Eddie
“Where does it say in Luke 7 that John failed? In all of chapter 7 Jesus has nothing but praise for John, and he admonishes the leaders of the Jews for not believing him (John).”
It doesn’t say in Luke 7 that ‘John failed’, and I did not say that those words were there. I am presenting you with the evidence that John failed.
Quote from Eddie
“And he will go as forerunner before the Lord in the spirit and power of Elijah, to turn the hearts of the fathers back to their children and the disobedient to the wisdom of the just, to make ready for the Lord a people prepared for him.”
“LEST I come and smite the earth with a curse”. Not an absolute, or God would not have used the word “Lest”.
Quote from Eddie
“At this particular time, Jesus alone is in the Kingdom. The Kingdom is within you (Luke 17:21). No other person could have been in the Kingdom of God until after Pentecost.”
Luke 7:28
“…but he that is least in the kingdom of God is greater than he.”
Jesus is saying ‘he that IS least…’, present tense (not future tense).
If Jesus is referring to people in the future, then how do they get into the kingdom, and John does not?
Quote continued
“This is when the Holy Spirit came down and began to dwell ‘within’ men who believed. This is the Gospel of the Kingdom of God that Jesus preached. God is to reign in our hearts. If he reigns there, we won’t have to be forced to do God’s will; fulfilling his will would be our greatest desire. This was Jesus’ greatest desire; it was the very food for his Spirit (John 4:34).”
I say this from your viewpoint, ‘Didn’t John also believe?
I need to clarify something here, do you believe that John gets into the kingdom? My answer to this question is not a yes/no answer. It’s more complicated. Another subject.
I have not responded to your penultimate paragraph, as it relates to a question I have asked just before it.
Quote from Eddie
“Normally, I neither post nor reply to a cut and paste. However, I’ll read what you have posted and consider replying to it. If I decide to reply, I’ll approve the ‘cut and paste’ comment, and reply beneath it, like I would any other comment.”
Thank you, I do not foresee me doing so again.
God Bless.
Arthur
Additional
Look at those words of Jesus…
John 5:31-32
31If I bear witness of myself, my witness is not true.
32There is another that beareth witness of me; and I know that the witness which he witnesseth of me is true.
Jesus is saying if I bear witness to myself, it’s not true.
John is a witness to me.
Yet three chapters later, we see Jesus is doing a very strange thing…
John 8:12-18
Then spake Jesus again unto them, saying, I am the light of the world: he that followeth me shall not walk in darkness, but shall have the light of life.
The Pharisees therefore said unto him, Thou bearest record of thyself; thy record is not true.
Jesus answered and said unto them, Though I bear record of myself, yet my record is true: for I know whence I came, and whither I go; but ye cannot tell whence I come, and whither I go.
Ye judge after the flesh; I judge no man.
And yet if I judge, my judgment is true: for I am not alone, but I and the Father that sent me.
It is also written in your law, that the testimony of two men is true.
I am one that bear witness of myself, and the Father that sent me beareth witness of me.
Notice anything strange here? Jesus is testifying to Himself, after saying that if He does that, they should not believe Him.
But most strange is, WHERE is Johns testimony?
Jesus, have you forgotten about the person who was to prepare a nation before you?
God Bless
What I am replying to in this post is a ‘cut and paste’. Normally, I will not post a ‘cut and paste’ comment or reply to one. However, this one was brief enough to consider and Arthur, the gentleman I am discussing with, sought to further clarify his viewpoint by including this from his website. The fact that I am replying to this ‘cut and paste’ in no way obligates me to do so again, for Arthur or anyone else. I merely wish to add this disclaimer. :-)
James 2:24
“You see that a person is justified by what he does…”
John’s initial testimony to Jesus was direct, assertive and unequivocal.
But what were the real results of John’s ministry? That is, how many people came to Jesus as a result of John’s testimony? How many of Jesus’ disciples started out as John’s disciples? Was John a follower of Jesus?
The four Gospel narratives are about Jesus and no one else. Whatever is of interest to his 3 ½ year public ministry is there. Other people are mentioned only as their story applies to Jesus and his Gospel. Very little is said about John the Baptist, to try to draw specific conclusions about his ministry from silence or general statements would be unwise, especially when the Gospel narratives are specifically about Jesus.
If we can believe Jesus’ summary of John’s ministry in Luke 7, John did fine. Jesus had nothing but praise concerning John. If we are to believe Gabriel’s prophecy about John in Luke 1, while speaking with Zechariah, then John did fine. To conclude otherwise would mean that Gabriel, an angel sent by God himself, made a false prophecy.
Even though he denied that he was the Elijah, we can see in his choice of clothing that he in fact, had at least a modicum of awareness that he and the prophet of old shared some sort of common destiny.
Mathew 3:4
John’s clothes were made of camel’s hair, and he had a leather belt around his waist. His food was locusts and wild honey.
2 Kings 1:8
They replied, “He was a man with a Garment of hair and with a leather belt around his waist.”
The gentleman in the video is making a presumption about John 1:21, which he cannot support. The people who asked John if he were Elijah had false conceptions of who Elijah was. Their understanding was untrue and was not what God had claimed in Malachi 4. If John were to identify with their false teaching about Elijah, he would have been making a wrong statement. Gabriel told Zechariah that he should not be looking for **that** Elijah, the miracle worker who would come out of the sky in a chariot. For John to reply that he was **that** Elijah the Pharisees questioned him about, would be to deny the message of Gabriel who had said **that** Elijah didn’t exist.
What was John’s impact on his own disciples?
John 1:35-37
Again the next day after John stood, and two of his disciples; And looking upon Jesus as he walked, he saith, Behold the Lamb of God! And the two disciples heard him speak, and they followed Jesus.
This is the only known account of anyone following Jesus as a direct of John’s testimony. Two disciples. Yes, technically “two” is a “a people” as in “make a people prepared for the Lord”. However, even this result is debatable. One of the two is Andrew.
Matthew’s gospel, records Jesus witnessing directly to Andrew and his brother Peter with no mention whatsoever of John playing a role. The other disciple spent the day with Jesus, but we never find out if he remained beyond that one day. So maybe two, maybe one, or maybe even none.
The gentleman in the video presumes he knows what is going on, but he doesn’t. First of all, the account in John cannot be made to disagree with the account in Matthew, which is what he seems to be doing. John’s account of the two disciples occurs before Jesus’ public ministry. Jesus doesn’t name the 12 Apostles until several weeks into his public ministry. In fact, Peter who is mentioned in John doesn’t become an official disciple until after several meetings with Jesus. The gentlemen in the video seems to be bringing his doctrine to the text and then making the text prove his doctrine. That is not how it should work.
We see that John’s disciples, even after his initial testimony to Jesus, maintain their separate identity as “John’s disciples.” Weren’t they supposed to be “a people prepared for the Lord”?
Matthew 9:14
Then came to him the disciples of John, saying, Why do we and the Pharisees fast oft, but thy disciples fast not?
This does not sound like the disciples have been influenced by John’s initial testimony. Notice that they identify more closely with the Pharisees than with Jesus. And, by the way, why does John still have disciples at this late date anyway?
The conclusion is that though John’s initial testimony was powerful, for some reason it exerted little moral authority over his disciples to drop their nets and follow Jesus. Of course, the fact that John, himself, was not dropping his net and following may have contributed to that climate of hesitation.
Jesus said no one could come to him unless the Father would draw that person (John 6:44). Who were Jesus’ disciples was not up to John. It was up to the Father. John’s mission was to prepare a people, and the Father would draw whom he wished to be Jesus’ disciples. The harvest of John’s work was not during Jesus’ public ministry but after Pentecost, when the Holy Spirit fell down upon the disciples. That is when the disciples of Jesus began harvesting the people prepared for the Lord.
Moreover, John thought he should become a disciple of Jesus, and Jesus should take over his work (Matthew 3:14), but Jesus told him no. John should continue his work, and Jesus would do his. The righteousness of both ministries needed to be fulfilled (Matthew 3:15). So, naturally John would continue to have disciples. Jesus saw nothing wrong with that in Luke 7, where he praised John and condemned the Jewish leadership for not believing him (John).
John’s impact on the nation
What was the real influence of John’s testimony on the nation? There are two scriptures that give us an insight on this.
Matthew 16:13-14
When Jesus came into the coasts of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, saying, Whom do men say that I the Son of man am? And they said, Some say that thou art John the Baptist: some, Elias; and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets.
What does this reveal? What is missing from this information? Was anyone saying “Jesus is the lamb of God”?
Clearly they are familiar with the name and work of John. Obviously, they never heard John proclaiming that Jesus was the lamb of God.
What had John been testifying to while in Caesarea Philippi, if not about Jesus?
First, we have no record of John being in Caesarea Philippi. Jesus was not there because John had been there. Secondly, the speaker in the video presumes to draw ‘obvious’ conclusions from data he does not have. By the time of Jesus’ journey to Caesarea Philippi John had been dead for perhaps a year. People were drawing their own conclusions about Jesus. John’s work was finished, and it was praised by Jesus, so evidently the people were prepared, but the Gospel could not be received as it should until after Jesus was glorified and those drawn to him had the Holy Spirit.
We see the same in Judea.
Mark 6:14-15
And king Herod heard of him; (for his name was spread abroad:) and he said, That John the Baptist was risen from the dead, and therefore mighty works do shew forth themselves in him.
15Others said, That it is Elias. And others said, That it is a prophet, or as one of the prophets.
No one was saying “Jesus? Isn’t that the person John said was the lamb of God?
Given the scope of John’s mission as expressed by Gabriel, “to make a people prepared for the Lord,” this appears to fall short of that measure.
Again the gentleman in the video draws false conclusions. We know they are false because Gabriel predicted John **would** be great in the sight of God (Luke 1:15), that many in Israel **would** turn to God (Luke 1:16) and John **would** go forth in the spirit and power of Elijah (Luke 1:17).
What I see is that I must make a choice to believe either Gabriel or the man in the video. One of them is wrong. Gabriel predicts success, while the video concludes failure.
The most telling measure, is John’s experience with Herod.
Mark 6:19-20
Therefore Herodias had a quarrel against him, and would have killed him; but she could not: For Herod feared John, knowing that he was a just man and an holy, and observed him; and when he heard him, he did many things, and heard him gladly.
John had the kings ear. Herod “feared John”, “protected John” and “heard him gladly”. What was the most important bit of information that John could say to Herod? Perhaps, John needs to explain who Jesus is?.
Yet, after John is beheaded, we see Herod strangely confused by the presence of this new figure: Jesus of Nazareth.
Mark 6:16
But when Herod heard thereof, he said, It is John, whom I beheaded: he is risen from the dead.
It was John, risen from the dead? How could Herod be so incorrect about Jesus if John had been testifying effectively? Obviously, John never witnessed to the king. Not a word? Not, “behold the lamb of God”? Not, Herod, come and worship Jesus?
What I find **most telling** about the man in the video is that he would take Herod’s testimony over that of Jesus and Gabriel!
None of the Herods were spiritual men. They fancied themselves worshipers of God, but they sought to kill Jesus, killed John the Baptist, killed James the Apostle and mocked Paul for preaching Christianity. Why would anyone wish to evaluate the ministry of a great prophet of God on the testimony of one of the Herods?
No impact on his own disciples, No impact in Caesarea Philippi, No impact in Judea, No influence with king Herod.
Given these circumstances, how could anyone conclude that John accomplished his mission?
The impact on John’s disciples would not be realized until after Pentecost. Case in point would be Apollos in Acts 18:24-25. Knowing only the baptism of John, he preached Christ. Later, Paul met some men in Ephesus who are described as ‘disciples,’ presumably doing as Apollos had done, i.e. teaching Jesus, but knowing only the baptism of John; Paul instructed them more accurately, and they were baptized (Acts 19:1-5). You can’t get more ‘prepared’ than that.
If John had no impact on Judea, how is it that the Scriptures say all Judea came out to his baptism? If he had no impact, why were his enemies, the Jewish leadership, concerned about what he was doing? As far as Herod is concerned, neither Jesus nor any of the Apostles had any ‘impact’ on any of the Herods, except to alarm them and be the recipients of their persecution.
Given this understanding, I fail to comprehend how anyone could hold to the idea that John was a failure.
Lord bless,
Eddie
Greetings Arthur,
Concerning my analogy of buying computers…
I like your analogy, but it does not quite work. Using your above analogy the purchaser is either wrong or is lying. As the reality of this discussion, is being based on the words of Jesus…
Well, I have to say that your reply is true to form. You are also wrong. The key phrase was “Assuming everything above is true…” The only way the purchaser could have bought the computer for a lower price is to have purchased it outside of London—which, carrying this analogy over into Luke 7:28, the only way John, among the greatest of prophets, could not be as great as the least in the Kingdom is, if he were not in the Kingdom in the first place. Something having to do with the Kingdom makes people there in some way greater than anyone outside the Kingdom.
Concerning Jesus’ saying the ‘least’ in the Kingdom are greater than John…
Jesus would be correct to say this “IF” John did not fulfill that for which he had been born to do. The fact that Malachi say’s “Lest I smite the land with a curse”, clearly shows that there existed the possibility of something happening that was not God’s wishes.
If Jesus hadn’t praised John throughout Luke 7 for what he had done in his ministry, you might have a case, but you seem to latch on to Luke 7:28 and completely disregard the rest of the chapter. You seem to be willing to sacrifice context for the sake of your doctrine.
In the sense of mission, John Was the greatest one, but in attending Jesus as the Messiah, he was the least one because he did not follow Him and serve Him as the Messiah as God had intended.
What Scripture tells you that John did not attend Jesus as the Messiah or follow him as God had intended? What Scripture tells us what God intended John to do? You are making a statement in order to support your doctrine, but you are not offering a Scripture to support what you are trying to say.
Such a long explanation to explain what John meant, when asked if he were the Elijah?
Well, ordinarily I wouldn’t have to do that, but we disagree concerning what John 1:21 is saying.
Jesus would not have asked, for He already knew the answer. Also Jesus was answering this very question posed by the Pharasees as it was brought to him from his disciples, when it was asked of them.
You seem to be avoiding my point. I had asked: “What if…”
Concerning Jesus’ reply, Jesus was teaching his disciples. He was not so forthright with the Pharisees.
Concerning Luke 1:15…
Not a false prophecy “IF” John was successful. John was not a robot, he had free will, he could do, or not do.
The words are: “for he WILL BE GREAT in the sight of the Lord…” (emphasis mine). Moreover Jesus agreed in saying none was greater than John. :-)
Concerning Luke 1:16…
I have posted to you, the ‘actual’ accomplishments of John’s ministry, according to the accounts of the gospels. Exactly how many people did John turn to Jesus, according to the gospels?
The words are: “HE WILL TURN MANY of the people of Israel to the Lord their God…” (emphasis mine). And Jesus agrees: This is the one about whom it is written: ” ‘I will send my messenger ahead of you, WHO WILL PREPARE your way before you.’ (Luke 7:27 NIV – emphasis mine).
Concerning Luke 1:17…
John 1:20
And they asked him, What then? Art thou Elias? And he saith, I am not. Art thou that prophet? And he answered, No.
Let’s see if your interpretation is correct… The words are: “And HE WILL GO as forerunner before the Lord IN THE SPIRIT AND POWER OF ELIJAH, to turn the hearts of the fathers back to their children and the disobedient to the wisdom of the just, to make ready for the Lord a people prepared for him.” (Luke 1:17 NET. – emphasis mine). The prophecy says this is what he WILL do. John 1:21 cannot be made to contradict what God says he WILL do. If you THINK it contradicts, then the problem is with your thinking not with the Scripture itself. Men’s thinking must change to agree with Scripture.
Concerning Luke 1:15-17, I said either John did what Gabriel said he would do OR Gabriel was a false messenger of God…
Or John failed to do what Gabriel said he would do, and Gabriel was a true messenger.
Scripture doesn’t work that way, my friend. Either the prophet tells the truth, and everything he says comes true or he is a false prophet. The test of a prophet is whether or not what he says comes true—see Deuteronomy 18:21-22.
Are you asking me to show you something, which I never said? I at no time said that “John is inside the Kingdom”
If John is not inside the Kingdom, then why are you complaining that I am saying he is outside the Kingdom? If he isn’t in—he must be out. Is there another place to put him?
It doesn’t say in Luke 7 that ‘John failed’, and I did not say that those words were there. I am presenting you with the evidence that John failed.
Ah! Okay! If I do this, it is a long explanation without Scriptural support, but you are merely presenting me with the evidence. I’ll have to remember that. :-)
Concerning Gabriel’s statement in Luke 1:17…
“LEST I come and smite the earth with a curse”. Not an absolute, or God would not have used the word “Lest”.
“And he will go as forerunner before the Lord in the spirit and power of Elijah, to turn the hearts of the fathers back to their children and the disobedient to the wisdom of the just, to make ready for the Lord a people prepared for him.” (Luke 1:17 NET.)
Sorry, Arthur, there is no “lest” in Luke 1:17. Gabriel said John “…WILL GO… BEFORE THE LORD IN THE SPIRIT AND POWER OF ELIJAH…”
‘lest’ is your word, not God’s, as far as Luke 1:17 is concerned. If you choose to use a ‘lest’ from another Scripture, that Scripture MUST be read in such a way as to not contradict what Gabriel said WOULD occur (cp. John 10:35).
Luke 7:28
“…but he that is least in the kingdom of God is greater than he.”
Jesus is saying ‘he that IS least…’, present tense (not future tense).
If Jesus is referring to people in the future, then how do they get into the kingdom, and John does not?
Arthur, you just contradicted your own argument. You say that Jesus cannot be speaking of the future when he uses the present, yet in the above statement you used the present to express something stated in the past. We all do it. Scripture even uses the past to express the future (Psalm 110:1). David was speaking of a future event—see Mark 16:19.
Look at this Scripture: “Upon whom thou shalt see [future] the Spirit descending, and remaining on him, the same is [present] he which baptizeth [present] with the Holy Ghost” (John 1:33).
All the verbs are meant to be taken for the future, but two are in the present, and this is not difficult for us to understand. We note the context and it is automatic.
When Jesus spoke in Luke 7:28, the people understood that the Kingdom was not yet, so they understood Jesus was speaking in the future. They thought the Kingdom would come when Messiah arrived and repelled Rome. In reality, Jesus was speaking of a spiritual Kingdom, not of this world (John 18:36). It is a Kingdom within man (Luke 17:21). But, whether it was physical or spiritual, the Kingdom was yet future.
I say this from your viewpoint, ‘Didn’t John also believe?
John believed Jesus was the Messiah, yes. But the Kingdom was future (except the King of the Kingdom was already there i.e. Jesus).
I need to clarify something here, do you believe that John gets into the kingdom? My answer to this question is not a yes/no answer. It’s more complicated. Another subject.
Of course, John gets into the Kingdom, but he was dead before the Kingdom arrived. In the resurrection, John is in the Kingdom of God.
Lord bless,
Eddie