JOHN THE BAPTIST AS SEEN IN JOHN'S GOSPEL

^[p. 165] JOHN THE BAPTIST AS SEEN IN JOHN’S GOSPEL

John 1:6-8; John 1:15; John 1:19-37; John 3:26-34

JT Spirituality, as attaching to John’s gospel, is seen illustratively in the way in which John the baptist is introduced. As compared with the synoptical allusions to him, he is seen mainly as calling attention to Christ, as to His Person, and in this gospel no failure is attributed to him. He is introduced as “sent from God”, and that he might witness concerning the light; as if the standpoint of this gospel requires such an one to bear witness to Christ — one sent from God. And then we have his readiness to do so even at his own expense; as the incarnation is stated in verse 14 we have John’s witness, and that he cried saying, “This was he of whom I said, He that comes after me is preferred before me, for he was before me”.

In all the passages read we have the same character of testimony, all bringing out that there was at least one man here who, at the outset, appreciated Christ, unselfishly witnessing to His personal greatness. So that we have him saying in verse 34, “I have seen and borne witness that this is the Son of God”; and in the end of chapter 3 he is referred to as “the friend of the bridegroom”, one who rejoices because of the Bridegroom’s voice. So that he effaces himself and makes much of Christ — he disappears out of view saying that his joy is fulfilled, standing and hearing the Bridegroom. Although having a great personal mission from heaven, the time came when he stood and listened to Christ. He spoke of His heavenly glory; He had come from heaven as above all — “He who comes out of heaven is above all” (chapter 3: 31). I think that John fits in with the present time in that sense as an example for us to speak well of ^[p. 166] Christ, as apprehending His Person. The Lord says of him later that he was a burning and a shining light. When opposition thickens, as it is thickening according to chapter 10, He went to where John baptised at first, showing that He had kept John in mind. We might also keep him in mind as the one who spoke so well of Christ.

WW Is it in order that we should speak well of Christ, that you draw attention to John?

JT Yes. The Lord challenges the disciples elsewhere, “Whom say ye that I am?” Matthew 16: 15. We ought to be able to say who He is.

Rem I was thinking about verse 6, how God in the different ages had His men. He had the prophets to speak, but John seems to have a peculiar place. In Luke 24: 44 the Lord speaks of Moses and the prophets, they spoke of Him, but John has a special place.

JT He was one sent from God; the word “from” suggesting also that he was with God. The first credential of such an one ought to be that he speaks well of Christ, and this marks John strikingly. He was “a man sent from God”, not sent by God merely, but “from God”. He was sent by God, but he was sent from God, that is, he has been with God, as already said; and the more we are with God the more we will think rightly of Christ. So of the Word it is said, “He was in the beginning with God”; and the Spirit comes out “from with the Father”, as chapter 15: 26 (New Trans.) reads. He testifies of Christ — there is first-hand knowledge, the Spirit knowing the feelings of the Father, and of the love wherewith the Father loves the Son.

WHR In what sense was “the life ... the light of men”? Was it the Lord down here?

JT Quite so. “In him was life, and the life was the light of men. And the light appears in darkness,

and the darkness apprehended it not”. It is Christ as Man.

HS Are we to be with God in order to get this appreciation of Christ, to speak well of Him?

JT Well, that is the lesson in verse 6: a man sent not simply by God, but “sent from God”. You get a man earlier — Jehu — anointed and sent by God, but you could not speak of him being with God first; he was a fast driver and did things ruthlessly. John was sent from God; so that he is qualified to speak well of Christ. There is no voice from heaven in John, as in the synoptic gospels, speaking well of Christ; John in a sense takes that place in this gospel. The voice from heaven announced, “This is my beloved Son, in whom I have found my delight”. John was with God in the wilderness; he was in the deserts till the time of his showing to Israel. He was where there was no fleshly gratification: God would be before him, and he came out according to this gospel as “sent from God”. Those who are really sent from God will have right thoughts of Christ, and will convey them in words, too.

AEL Would you say it was a revelation from God to John?

JT Yes, he says, “He who sent me to baptise with water, he said to me, Upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending and abiding on him, he it is who baptises with the Holy Spirit” (verse 33). The idea of being sent was carried through. The great contrast between John and Christ is seen in what John says, that Christ is He who “baptises with the Holy Spirit”. He said previously, “I beheld the Spirit descending as a dove from heaven, and it abode upon him” (verse 32). He does not say anything about the voice, although it happened at the same time. He is the voice! He is the one who speaks well of Christ here.

FI ^[p. 168] Have you in mind that, as being with God, we should have a sense of the greatness of Christ, so that we see that all that has come in will be carried through?

JT At the end of the account he gives of the baptist, John the evangelist says, “The Father loves the Son, and has given all things to be in his hand”. And then there is a terrible penalty attached to not being subject to Him: “he that is not subject to the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God abides upon him”. The One whom the Father loves carries things through, showing that the administration of the economy is in the hands of the One who is loved. It is in the hands of the Son, that is, a divine Person in manhood.

FI In contrast to the Son, one of the greatest men in the Old Testament, Solomon, when he is finishing his course, turned aside from God, but here John the baptist is able to hand over all into the hands of this Person knowing that it is going to be carried through.

JT He stands and hears, meaning that his mission is finished. In verse 35 it says that John stood: “on the morrow, there stood John ...” He can stand as seeing the Spirit coming and abiding upon Christ; that is, God has committed Himself to Christ restfully — not taking Him on as He took David on and others. David had to say, “Take not thy holy spirit from me” (Psalm 51), but here there is an additional thought — “abiding” — One great enough for the Spirit to abide upon Him! John stood after that. He was baptising, and Jesus came to him to be baptised, but John says, “Behold the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world”. He introduces Christ. He says later, “I have seen and borne witness that this is the Son of God”. He not only saw the truth of Christ’s Person, but bore witness to it, and that is the point; you say what you ^[p. 169] believe, you testify to what you see. The Lord would help us to speak of Himself according to His full dignity, that is, according to what He is in the economy into which divine Persons have come; and what He is in His abstract personality. Although in the place of subjection, and receiving all from the Father as this gospel teaches us. He is yet equal with the Father, and that as Man.

AEL John’s record is that “This is the Son of God”.

JT Yes, that is the point, “This is the Son of God”. Then the following verses show that he fully understood what it meant; he is admiring the Lord; and in chapter 3 he is decreasing, “I must decrease”, he says — he is joyfully going out of sight; he is no rival to Christ. He has fulfilled his mission.

AEL From this record you would hardly know that John baptised Him. It is because of the greatness of the Person.

JT His actual baptism is left out purposely.

JM What is involved in the term “Son of God”?

JT In this gospel it is His divine personality that is stressed. There is nothing said about our being sons of God in this gospel, therefore it is more His own distinction. Matthew brings out the fact that we also are sons, and of course Paul develops it doctrinally; but John leaves that. It is implied, of course, we being brethren of Christ, but He is stressing the greatness of Christ, His sonship, which implies Deity.

WHR So the Lord in chapter 9 says, “Dost thou believe on the Son of God?”

JT That is a striking passage. In Romans 8, you have the thought, “if Christ be in you ...” (verse 10). This gospel opens that up. Certain persons mentioned are those in whom Christ is characteristically. He is in John the baptist sacrificially, because he calls Him the “Lamb of God”. In chapter 9 Christ is seen as Son of God by the man who had been cast out. The Lord had in mind that that man should understand sonship; it was one of the features of the truth to be set out in that man. He has neither “sinned nor his parents, but that the works of God should be manifested in him” (chapter 9: 3). That is the thought, the effect was to be seen; it is a great point, not simply what we think, but what can be seen in us. So the Lord heard that he was cast out; He waits for that. There is a very striking link there with the present time, because it is the outside place that is needed for all these great things. The Lord waited till he was cast out, and then He finds him and says to him, “Dost thou believe on the Son of God?” He answers, “Who is he, Lord?” The Lord says, “Thou hast both seen him, and he that speaks with thee is he”. And he says, “I believe, Lord: and he did him homage”. I believe that that is the point today, to be in the outside place, whether we leave the evil or it casts us out, it is the same thing. When the Lord hears that we are outside, He finds us. That is the point to be noted, because I do not believe that those who remain in a position where Christ’s rights are not owned, get light. They do not get the light that belongs to the full position. The Son of God has inaugurated, and is carrying on, another order of things, and that involves separation.

The first thing that is said of John as to his own action, I mean as to his personal testimony, is that he “bears witness of him, and he has cried, saying, This was he of whom I said, He that comes after me is preferred before me, for he was before me”. He cried. It is not simply saying here, but crying so that everybody is to hear. It is not what we think of Him, it is not simply that we should know who He is, but what do we say of Him? Here John’s testimony is stressed, “he has cried, saying ...”

AEL “He was before me”, what is meant by that?

JT It is a question of Christ’s Person. John was born before Christ. He alludes to the Lord’s deity, not His history on earth. John’s remark refers to what was before time. We have, “In [the] beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God”. There is no article before the word ‘beginning’ here; it would mean that the Lord was in the beginning, when or whatever it was. In Genesis we read, “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth”, Genesis 1: 1. The angels were evidently there at that time because they were there when the foundations of the earth were laid (Job 38). So that, whenever there was in any sense a beginning, this Person was there already. He did not begin then; God forbid such a thought in anyone! He was there, He was at that time, He was with God, and was God. He was there, as this narrative gives it, “All things received being through him, and without him not one thing received being which has received being”. He was the Person who did everything, who made everything. All came into being by His instrumentality. There was not one thing, John says, that received being without Him. That is a striking statement as to created things.

GE He Himself had no beginning.

JT The marvellous way things are put here fits into our minds so that they should be fixed as to that. This is an outstanding passage as to the deity of Christ. In seeking to help christians it is wise to start with this verse; all christians in the world should agree on this verse. Some may shrink from the truth of separation, but if God has wrought in a man’s heart he would freely accept these early verses of John.

HS Christ has, at least, this place in the heart of every ^[p. 172] christian.

JT I think so. The peculiar wording of this passage is intended to fit into our minds so that it we can all be on common ground on this point, and we cannot go any further if we are not. I think John the baptist is the characteristic man as to this. He is ready for this! A man who had the greatest place in the testimony, and had the opportunity of assuming to be the Messiah, or one of the great prophets; but he effaces himself, preferring One greater than he. Then when the incarnation is first given by John the evangelist (verse 14), in saying “we have contemplated his glory ...” John the baptist cries and says, “he was before me”. It is John’s witness of Christ — “he has cried, saying, This was he of whom I said, He that comes after me is preferred before me, for he was before me”. He had already said it, and now he is crying as to it!

WHR John saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove. What do you understand by that?

JT Verse 32 reads, “And John bore witness, saying, I beheld the Spirit descending as a dove from heaven, and it abode upon him”. I have no doubt the allusion would be to Genesis 8. There are peculiar touches in that chapter about the dove. She was sent out by Noah and received back to him; she came back, she found no rest for the sole of her foot. Finally, she came back with an olive leaf in her mouth, not a floating dead one, but “plucked off”, showing that the link now is established with life, vegetable life. She is spoken of as over against the raven, a different bird. It is the distinctiveness of the dove. And we know how it is spoken of in the Canticles, the love-book. It would allude to the Spirit, in that sense, coming in on the Person of Christ — nothing to disturb, because evidently the dove is very sensitive. So that we are enjoined not to grieve the Spirit, nor to quench Him. The dove represents the Spirit in its entirety, it is a whole ^[p. 173] idea. It is not given by measure, it comes unconditionally, unreservedly, on Christ, as if to honour Him as great enough for it. It was in entire keeping with the voice from heaven, “This is my beloved Son, in whom I have found my delight”, not given in this gospel, as we have said. Then the Spirit, showing that there is nothing at all to disturb, is there.

AEL Would sealing be a similar thought? Sealing and anointing are both applied to the Lord.

JT Yes, I think sealing is that He is marked off as peculiarly the Father’s.

JM There is a good deal in this gospel about seeing — “I have seen and borne witness ...”

JT Yes; thus we are challenged as to whether we have eyes to see. What John saw was remarkable. The word to him was, “Upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending ...” Of course, there were many others there at the time from Judaea and Jerusalem; people came from all directions to John to be baptised, and this must have been a day of great note. Did all see what happened? The word to him was not simply, Upon whom the Spirit comes, but “Upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending”. That is, You are to see it. Your testimony is not to be second-hand, it is to be first-hand. What testimony we have is through others, but John the baptist is honoured in seeing this, being a witness of the Spirit in the form of a dove coming on another divine Person. Think of the magnitude of that; of one being told that he is to see that. So that he is a competent witness. And then he adds, “And I have seen ...” He is a first-hand witness, as already said.

JM Is that not a principle — we have to see things for ourselves before we give witness?

JT Yes. The thought runs through this gospel, “Come and see”. In these last days doctrine is not enough, it is what is seen.

Ques Why does John say, “And I knew him not”?

JT I think that it is to show that his knowledge of Christ is not a mere knowledge derived from personal physical contact. He was His relative after the flesh — John’s mother is called Mary’s cousin. Before John was born and before Christ was born, John was affected by Him through the hearing of his mother. His contact with Christ for testimony was spiritual. Relationships in the flesh do not help in the testimony. All must be on a spiritual basis.

AEL How do you account for the expression, “the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world”, in this gospel, and then, later, “Behold the Lamb of God”?

JT Well, it points to the place that Christ had with John. Both statements are connected with the movements of Christ. What John saw, what he bore record of (verse 32), was not a movement of Christ, but a movement of the Spirit on Him. But the expression, “Behold the Lamb of God”, is the outcome of a movement of Christ. First, He came to John — “he sees Jesus coming to him” (verse 29); then secondly, (verse 36), he saw Jesus “as he walked”. It alludes to the manner of Christ’s walk, I believe. Genesis 2 is in mind, Adam naming the creatures. He would observe the peculiar features of the sheep, or of the lamb; and I think, therefore, what is meant is that Christ is in John sacrificially. He is not only apprehended as a Person who was before him, but He is a sacrificial Person, as seen in Isaiah 53 — over against other lambs that are mentioned. The word “lamb” as in Scripture is generally connected with sacrifice, as in Genesis 22.

WHR His taking away of the sin of the world — would that be as before God?

JT It is the sacrificial side; it is not the military side. It involves the judgment of God, but He will deal with sin in a military ^[p. 175] way too.

WHR I suppose that has been done in the death of Christ?

JT Well, it has; but “takes away” is a characteristic word. It is better to keep it so than make it merely historical.

JM What do you mean by military action in this connection?

JT Well. Revelation 19 shows that He will come down militarily to deal with lawlessness, actual removal requires military action; but this is the sacrificial side, sin could never be dealt with according to God otherwise. It might be dealt with punitively, all sinners might be sent to the lake of fire, but we need the sacrificial side to bring out what God is in regard of the world. The sacrificial side meets that; it brings out what God is. The military side is detail really. Taking away sin in a sacrificial sense reveals God. This is the greater thought. The taking away is a great moral thought. God stands out in it.

Ques Was that a necessity before God could move?

JT Well, a sacrifice had to take place. I think it is well to keep the thing in its present tense. He is the Taker-away of the sin of the world, as the Lamb of God: not the Son here — He is the Lamb.

Ques Is that why there was no following to the first “Behold”?

JT The time had not come morally. The next day is the day for following. Verse 35 says, “On the morrow, there stood John and two of his disciples. And, looking at Jesus as he walked, he says, Behold the Lamb of God”. He is not now coming to John, as in verse 29; coming to John meant that He was going to die, “he sees Jesus coming to him”.

FI I do not quite understand what difference you are making between “Behold the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world” and “Behold the Lamb of God” in verse 36.

JT Well, “as he walked” — John stood and saw that. But the other is “Jesus coming to him”.

FI It is a further movement here — Behold the Person. They saw Him and they said, “Where abidest thou?” and He said, “Come and see”.

JT The first is the sacrificial work, the taking away of the sin of the world; there is no following yet. But in verse 36 the Lord is walking. The order here is, first what is to be understood as a finished matter; not that it is not to be continuous in its effect, because it is, but it is in principle a finished matter; and the next thing is the Lamb walking — what that Person is now, where is He going? He is not walking aimlessly. In Genesis 18 three persons came to Abraham. They were detained and entertained by him, and they accepted the entertainment. But they were on the way. Abraham was not the final objective in their minds, it was Sodom; they were going to Sodom. Abraham interceded for Sodom, but the judgment was not stayed. Abraham went to his place, and Jehovah went on, and the judgment is executed. But now the Lamb is walking; not now to die, but to reach some result. It is the time to gather results now. I think that verse 36 is the Lamb’s movements as gathering results, and we all want to be in that. We are all results of the taking away of the sin of the world. The world is not left as it was, there are people coming out of it.

AEL The Person who accomplished the work is becoming the Object of attraction.

JT Yes. “I, if I be lifted up ... will draw all to me”. John 12: 32.

JFC Is this gospel, coming in last, intended to be peculiarly steadying to faith when general departure has begun?

JT Quite so. It is full of that.

JFC Which is important — what has been seen, or what is to be ^[p. 177] seen?

JT Both are important: the latter implies continued freshness. This comes out in what the Lord says to those following: “But Jesus having turned, and seeing them following, says to them, What seek ye? And they said to him, Rabbi (which, being interpreted, signifies Teacher), where abidest thou? He says to them, Come and see”. That is the principle — “Come and see”. It is not now to see Him, but to see where He abides. If we see Him walking, and follow Him, then the next thing is, where He abides. He says, “Come and see”. So that we are set in movement; it is really an astronomical idea, there is now a moving system with a centre. And hence as you run down the chapter you have “Come and see”. There is constant movement now, in relation to a centre — not aimless movement. So that as we come to chapter 4, to the poor soul that meets the Lord at the well. He says to her, “If thou knewest the gift of God, and who it is that says to thee, Give me to drink, thou wouldest have asked of him ...” The Person would be before her. And presently she moves, and others move; so that it is not a stationary thing. In the cathedrals, and the parishes, and the dioceses, the see of Rome included, things are all fixed, as if people were going to stay here. Even if we get a nice meeting-room, there is a tendency to settle in. But John has in mind that we are to be in movement.

JFC It is the Person that is putting us together in the present time.

JT Well, that is why I suggested looking at this scripture. We need to understand movement in relation to Christ.

FI This would affect us on the first day of the week — “Come and see”.

JT In seeking to help the Lord’s people who have not found Christ as a centre, it is a great advantage to ^[p. 178] get them to come into the circle of life, and see what there is — however little.

PTW These things are written to get believers to “believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing ye might have life in his name”, John 20: 31.

JT Yes. “That ... ye might have life”, and it is “in his name”. If there is a living state of things at all, however feeble, then it is worth seeing, and we should not be afraid of asking people to “come and see”. Get them in touch with what is living.

GE In chapter 17 the Lord prays “that where I am they also may be with me, that they may behold my glory”. Seeing is the great thing all through.

JT I think chapter 12 is the kind of thing that we should keep in our minds. The Lord comes to Mary of Bethany the third time. His first coming is seen in Luke 10, and He comes a second time, according to John in chapter 11, then a third time in chapter 12. In the first, Mary is mentioned as at the feet of Jesus. Now He comes “six days before the passover”, and Lazarus is in mind, whom He raised from the dead. He is alluded to as “the dead man Lazarus”, and yet he is raised from the dead; meaning that he is dead as regards this world — a Colossian thought. Jesus came there, and Lazarus sat at the table and Martha served. Then (verse 9), the Jews began to come to see Lazarus also, not only to see Jesus. There was something there to see as a testimony to Christ’s power in Lazarus.

GE Should that be seen amongst christians?

JT Yes, a living state of things. I believe that is the great thing that John has in mind — eternal life. It was brought before us by the Lord half a century ago. The point was to get brethren to live, instead of going on with a mere form of meetings, and the order of the assembly not followed much. Then, if you have that, the order proper to the assembly ^[p. 179] will be developed. God planted a garden in Eden, and He set Adam to dress it and keep it. The dressing and keeping refers to an order of things, and it is what the Lord has been engaging us with for many years; how in a living way we come back to divine order — and what God delights in, growth in life, regulated by divine order.

RW Would you speak of John’s gospel as being new creation?

JT Well, it is more the family side. It is birth: birth is a greater thought, really, than creation — to be born of God. “As many as received him, to them gave he the right to be children of God, to those that believe on his name; who have been born, not of blood, nor of flesh’s will, nor of man’s will, but of God”. It is children; also brethren, as in chapter 20 — the family of God.

WHR When Peter raised up Dorcas he presented her living.

JT So the Lord in the Acts presented Himself living; that is, that we might see life as in Him — the true thought of it.