The Question of John the Baptist and Jesus’ Indictment of the Religious Leaders. Roberto a. Martinez

who is to come.” Ernst finds in the passage a “literary reflection” of the Q-community’s christological consolidation of Jesus, the “Son of Man,” and the Baptist’s eschatological judge.81 Ernst thinks that this happened in the early Palestinian mission when people who had adopted the call to conversion had not yet taken the last step of faith in Christ.82 The early captivity and beheading of the Baptist would have prevented a greater confrontation with Jesus but also resulted in a certain ambiguity regarding the historical relationship between Jesus and the Baptist.83

For Ernst, the meaning of 7:24–28 is that the Baptist cannot be classified in any traditional category.84 The passage portrays John as the Zeitenwende man who initiated the coming of the reign of God, which had not yet been officially proclaimed by Jesus. Ernst also highlights the ecclesiological orientation of the passage that reflects the role of the community of Jesus in the process of the proclamation of the kingdom in Israel.85

After discussing the redactional difficulties of the parable of the children in the marketplace, Ernst interprets it as referring to the increasing opposition that the community behind Q experienced in its missionary efforts.86 In his view, the competition between the disciples of the Baptist and the disciples of Jesus is transferred to the present controversy with the Judaic contemporaries: “Der Gegensatz zwischen Johannes und Jesus einerseits und ‘diesem Geschlecht’ andererseits ist also der Gegensatz zwischen ihnen und dem Volk Israel, zugleich auch der Gegensatz zwischen der Kindern, die der Weisheit Recht geben, und den launischen Kindern, also zwischen den Gemeinde und Israel.”87

Among the works that apply a social-scientific approach to the investigation of John the Baptist, Robert L. Webb’s analysis of John within the context of Second Temple Judaism occupies a prominent place. Webb accepts for the most part the historicity of passage.88 Although his research is focused on the ministry of the Baptist prior to the baptism of Jesus, Webb examines the implication of the Lukan episode for his social analysis. For Webb the question of the Baptist (7:19), which besides its explanatory notes and minor variations differs little from Q, helps to identify Jesus as the expected figured previously announced by John and the one who resolves the eschatological tension set forth by the Baptist’s proclamation.89 In the pericope, Jesus legitimizes the prophetic role of John as the greatest among all human beings and implicitly identifies him as Elijah redivivus.90 Jesus also condemns the people for rejecting his message and that of John, and forecasts the vindication of their ministries by the acknowledgment of their wisdom.91

In a short but scholarly presentation of the Baptist, Carl R. Kazmierski deals with the question of John and the testimony of Jesus. Recognizing that the tradition received from Q has been shaped by the theological interest of the evangelists and the underlying situation of their communities, Kazmierski nonetheless defends the overall historicity of the account.92 Applying a social-scientific approach that focuses on stereotyped role-playing or labeling theory, Kazmierski explains that the text reflects the historical concerns of the people to identify the Baptist and Jesus within the context of their prophetic messianic expectations.93 The passage also depicts the struggle of the early church to understand the Baptist’s role in the plan of God and his relationship with Jesus.94

Another author who examines the passage in a historical reconstruction of John the Baptist is Joan Taylor. Following the lead of many other investigations, Taylor accepts that the traditions about the Baptist in the NT are overlaid with an ongoing Christian polemic regarding Jesus’ superiority, but at the same time, she argues that the NT material is historically valuable.95 Taylor discusses the possible links of the Baptist to the Essenes, and his role as teacher and prophet as well as his relationship with the Pharisees and Jesus. Taylor appeals to 7:18–35 as a witness to John’s ascetic lifestyle and highlights his role as teacher with a group of disciples.96

Taylor cites 7:29–30 in her discussion about the relationship between John and the Pharisees to support her claim that they were not necessarily at odds despite the harsh assessment of the Pharisees in some passages.97 For Taylor, in the delegation of his disciples to Jesus, John was trying to find out whether Jesus was the expected prophet, that is, Elijah. Moreover the question indicates that John was still alive at the time Jesus began his public ministry.98 In dealing with the relationship between Jesus and the Baptist, Taylor concludes that Jesus seems to be saying that John, as the greatest man that ever lived, enables people to enter the kingdom of God but, by virtue of a new order, the members of this kingdom become greater than he.

The point does not really concern John at all, who remains ‘more than a prophet’: there is still no one greater than him. The point is about the radical inversions of the kingdom of heaven, in which someone as insignificant as an innocent little baby may be considered ‘greater’ than John (who is still part of the kingdom, and no doubt the greatest one in it); the innocent little baby is the paradigm of excellence.”99

In Taylor’s assessment, 7:31–35 is a protest of Jesus against the people who rejected his and John’s prophetic call.100

John P. Meier’s critical analysis of the historical Jesus examines the pericope in discussing the relationship between the Baptist and Jesus.101 In outlining the secondary nature of the exact narrative setting, Meier discusses the complex tradition history that would have influenced the placement of a similar saying of Jesus in different contexts (Matt 11:12–13 // Luke 16:16).102 He presumes “certain points” generally accepted by most scholars regarding the authenticity of the Baptist tradition and repeatedly argues in favor of the historicity of the account.103 Meier downplays the often heard claim that most of the pericope has been developed by the early church in its polemic against the Baptist sectarians. According to Meier, the Baptist seems to be revising his previous view about the “coming one” given the shift of emphasis in the message of Jesus. “John’s question is therefore a genuine, tentative probe, allowing that he might have to revise his hopes in order to avoid giving them up entirely.”104

In Meier’s opinion, the indirect answer of Jesus and the concluding beatitude is a tacit exhortation to John to recognize in him the realization of the plan of God.105 Jesus balances his appeal to John with a high praise that extols the Baptist as more than a prophet and the greatest of those born of women with a statement that may hold a veiled contrast to Herod Antipas, who executed John.106