And this is the testimony of John, when the Jews sent from Jerusalem priests and Levites to him, to ask him: Who art thou?

“Above, the Evangelist showed how Christ was made known to the apostles themselves by the testimony of John; here he explains that testimony more fully. And first he sets down John's testimony to the crowds; second, the testimony which he bore concerning Christ to his own disciples, there: "The next day John again was standing." Now if the things that have been said are well considered, a twofold testimony of John to Christ is found. One that he bore to Christ in his presence, the other in his absence; for unless John had borne testimony in his presence, he would not have said "this was he," and unless in his absence, he would not say "of whom I said to you." First, therefore, the Evangelist explains John's testimony which he bore concerning Christ in his absence; second, that which he bore in his presence, there: "The next day he saw." Now these two testimonies differ, because the first he bore when questioned, the other of his own accord; and therefore in the first testimony there is set down not only the testimony which he bore, but also the questioning itself. Now first he was questioned about his person; second about his office, there: "and they who had been sent." It is shown, therefore, first how John confessed himself not to be what he was not; second how he did not deny himself to be what he was, there: "They said therefore to him: Who are you?" Concerning the first, three questions and three answers are set down, as is clear in the text. Now in the first question there is great reverence of the Jews toward John, who send to him, seeking his testimony. And here the greatness of the reverence is gathered from four things. First, from the dignity of those sending: for it was not Galileans who sent, but those who were foremost among the people of Israel, namely the Jews, who are of the tribe of Judah, dwelling near Jerusalem; 1 Chronicles 5: "of Judah the Lord chose the princes of the people"; below, 4:22: "salvation is from the Jews." Second, from the pre-eminence of the place, because from Jerusalem, which is the priestly city, and devoted to divine worship; below, 4:20: "you say that at Jerusalem is the place where one must worship." Isaiah 19:21: "and they shall worship him with sacrifices and offerings." Third, from the authority of the messengers, who were solemn, and holier among the people, because priests and Levites; Isaiah 61:6: "you shall be called the priests of the Lord." Fourth, from this, that they sent so that John might bear testimony about himself, as it were having such faith in his words, that they would believe John even when bearing testimony about himself. Whence it is said that they asked him, "Who are you?" — which they did not do to Christ; on the contrary they said to him, John 8:13: "you bear testimony about yourself," and so on. Accordingly, when he says "and he confessed, and did not deny," John's answer is set down. Now the Evangelist repeats this that he says "and he confessed," in order to show John's humility: for although he was of such great authority among the Jews that they believed him to be the Christ, nevertheless he did not usurp for himself an honor not owed to him; on the contrary he confessed, "because I am not the Christ." But what is this that he says, "he confessed, and did not deny"? Now it seems that he did deny, because he says that he is not the Christ. But it must be said that for this reason he did not deny the truth, because he said that he was not the Christ: otherwise he would have denied the truth. Job 31:26: "if I beheld the sun when it shone, and the moon walking in brightness; and my heart rejoiced in secret, and I kissed my hand with my mouth: which is the greatest iniquity, and a denial against the most high God." Therefore he did not deny the truth, because however great he was held to be, he was not lifted up in pride, usurping for himself another's honor. And he confessed, "because I am not the Christ": because truly he was not. Above: "he was not the light," and so on. But since those who had been sent were not asking whether he was the Christ, but who he was, why did John answer, "I am not the Christ"? But it must be said that he answers rather to the mind of those questioning than to the question; and this can be taken in two ways. For according to Origen it must be understood that the priests and Levites had come to him with good intention. For they had known from the Scriptures, and especially from the prophecy of Daniel, that the time of Christ's coming had already come. Whence, seeing John's holiness, they suspected him to be the Christ: whence they sent to John, as it were wanting to know, through this that they say to him, "Who are you?", whether he would profess himself to be the Christ. And therefore he answered to their mind, "I am not the Christ." But Chrysostom says that they were questioning fraudulently. For John was a kinsman of the priests, being the son of a chief priest; he was also holy; and yet he was bearing testimony to Christ, whose lineage seemed lowly. Whence also they said: "is not this the son of the carpenter?" And he was unknown to them. And therefore, desiring rather to have John as master than Christ, they send to him wanting to allure him by flatteries, and to induce him, by attributing this honor to himself, to confess himself to be the Christ. Seeing indeed this malice, John says, "I am not the Christ." The second question is set down accordingly, when it is said, "and they asked him: What then? Are you Elijah?" Now it must be known that just as the Lord to come was awaited by the people of the Jews, so Elijah was awaited as going to precede Christ; Malachi, last chapter, 5: "I will send you Elijah," and so on. And therefore those who had been sent, seeing that John was not confessing himself to be the Christ, insist that at least he confess whether he is Elijah. And this is what they say, "What then? Are you Elijah?" Now certain heretics say that the soul is transmitted from body to body. And this doctrine was at that time in authority among the Jews, whence they believed that, on account of the likeness of John's works to Elijah's, the soul of Elijah was in the body of John. And they say that these men were asking John whether he was Elijah; that is, whether the soul of Elijah was in John; and they bring forward on their behalf that the Lord says, Matthew 11:14, concerning John: "if you will to know, he is Elijah." But nevertheless John's answer is contrary to them, saying, "I am not Elijah." To which they themselves reply that John answered out of ignorance, not knowing whether his soul was the soul of Elijah. But against this Origen says that it seems highly unreasonable that John, as a prophet illuminated by the Spirit, and narrating such great things about God's Only-begotten, should be ignorant about himself, whether his soul had ever been in Elijah. Not with this intention, therefore, were they asking, "Are you Elijah?" But because, having it from the Scriptures, 2 Kings 2:11, that Elijah was not dead, but was taken up alive through a whirlwind into heaven, they believed him to have suddenly appeared among them. But against this is that John had been born of known parents, and his birth was known to all. Whence it is said, Luke 1:63, that "all wondered, and laid it up in their heart, saying: What, do you think, shall this child be?" To which it can be said that it is not incredible that they should so estimate concerning John, as has been said. Because also something similar is found, Matthew 14:1, that Herod believed concerning Christ that he was John, whom he himself had beheaded, and yet long before John was beheaded, Christ had preached, and had been known. And therefore, out of a similar madness and grossness, the Jews were asking John whether he himself was Elijah. But what is this that John says, "I am not," namely Elijah, since Christ said, Matthew 11:14, "he is Elijah"? Now the Angel resolves this question, Luke 1:17: "he shall go before him in the spirit and power of Elijah," namely in his works. Therefore he was not Elijah in person, but in spirit, and power: because, namely, he showed the likeness of Elijah in his works. Now the likeness can be considered with respect to three things. First, with respect to office: because just as Elijah will come before the second coming of the Lord, so this one preceded the first, and so on. Whence also the Angel said: "he shall go before him," and so on. Second, with respect to manner of living: because Elijah dwelt in the deserts, used sparing food and was clothed with rough garments, as is said 1 Kings 19:3 ff. and 2 Kings 1:8. And John was in the deserts, his food was locusts and wild honey, and his belt was of camel's hair. Third, with respect to zeal: because he was of the greatest zeal; whence he said, 1 Kings 19:10: "with zeal I have been zealous for the Lord." So also John died out of zeal for the truth, as is clear Matthew 14:6 ff. Accordingly, when he says "Are you a prophet?" the third question is set down. Here first it is asked: Since it is said, Luke 1:76: "you, child, shall be called the prophet of the Most High," and so on, what is it that John, being asked whether he was a prophet, answered that he was not a prophet? To which the answer is given in three ways. In one way, that John is not a prophet simply, but more than a prophet. For the other prophets only foretold future things from afar; Habakkuk 2:3: "if it makes delay, wait for it"; but John announced Christ present, as it were pointing him out with the finger; below: "behold the Lamb of God." And therefore, Matthew 11:9, the Lord says that he is more than a prophet. Likewise in another way, according to Origen, because the Jews out of a bad understanding believed that three excellent persons would come about the coming of Christ, namely Christ himself, Elijah, and a certain other greatest prophet, concerning whom Deuteronomy 18:15: "the Lord will raise up for us a prophet," and so on. And although this greatest prophet, according to the truth, is none other than Christ, nevertheless according to the Jews he is another than Christ; and therefore they do not ask simply whether he is a prophet, but whether he is that greatest prophet. And this indeed appears from the order of the question. For first, they ask whether he is the Christ; second, whether he is Elijah; third, whether he is that prophet. And therefore in the Greek the article is placed here, so that it is said "the prophet," as if spoken by antonomasia. In a third way, because the Pharisees were moved against John, that he had assumed to himself the office of baptizing beyond the order of the law and their tradition. Now in the Old Testament there is mention of three to whom it could belong to baptize, namely of Christ; Ezekiel 36:25, in the person of Christ, it is said: "I will pour out upon you clean water," and so on. Likewise of Elijah, of whom it is said 2 Kings 2:8 that he divided the waters of the Jordan, and passing over was taken up. Likewise of Elisha, who made Naaman the Syrian wash himself seven times in the Jordan, that he might be cleansed of leprosy: as is said 2 Kings 5:9. Seeing therefore John baptize, the Jews believed him to be one of these, namely Christ, or Elijah, or Elisha; and therefore when they say here "Are you a prophet?" they ask whether he is Elisha. And "prophet" is said in the singular, on account of the many miracles which he had done; whence he himself says 2 Kings 5:8: "let him know that there is a prophet in Israel." And according to this he answers "I am not," namely Elisha. Accordingly, when he says "They said therefore to him: Who are you?" he shows how he confessed himself to be what he was, and first the question of the messengers is set down; second the answer, there: "I am the voice of one crying in the desert." They said therefore: "Who are you, that we may give an answer to those who sent us?" As if to say: for this we have been sent, that we may know who you are; therefore tell us, what do you say about yourself? But note John's devotion: he has already fulfilled what the Apostle says, Galatians 2:20, "I live, now not I, but Christ lives in me." And therefore he does not answer: I am the son of Zechariah, or such and such; but only that in which he was following Christ. Whence he says: "I am the voice of one crying in the desert." Now he says that he is a voice, because the voice is later in origin than the word, but prior in making known. For the word conceived in the heart, we come to know through the voice uttered, since it is the sign of it. Now God the Father sent the forerunner John, made in time, so that his Word conceived from eternity might be announced; and therefore he fittingly says "I am the voice." But what he adds, "of one crying," can be understood in two ways, namely that it is either of John crying and preaching in the desert, or of Christ crying in him, according to that of 2 Corinthians, last chapter, 3: "do you seek a proof of him who speaks in me, Christ?" Now he cries on account of four things. For first, a cry implies manifestation; and therefore, to show that Christ was speaking manifestly in John and in himself, he cries; below 7:37: "on the last and great day of the festival Jesus stood, and cried, saying: If anyone thirsts, let him come to me and drink." But in the prophets he did not cry, because the prophecies were given in enigma and figures; whence in Psalm 17:12 it is said: "dark water in the clouds of the air." Second, because a cry is made to those who are distant; but the Jews were far away from God, therefore it was necessary that he cry. Psalm 87:19: "you have put far from me friend and neighbor." Third, he cries, because they were deaf. Isaiah 42:19: "who is deaf, but my servant?" Fourth, he cries, because he speaks with indignation, because they had merited the wrath of God. Psalm 2:5: "he shall speak to them in his wrath," and so on. But note that he cries "in the desert," because, Luke 3:2, "the word of the Lord came upon John the son of Zechariah in the desert." And there can be a reason of this kind both literal and mystical. Literal indeed, so that, remaining in the desert, he might be free from all sin, so that he might thus be more worthy to bear testimony to Christ, and from his life his testimony might be more credible to men. Now the mystical cause is twofold. For by the desert the Gentiles are designated, according to that of Isaiah 54:1: "many are the children of the desolate, more than of her that has a husband." Therefore, to show that the teaching of God henceforth ought not to be in Jerusalem only, but among the Gentiles, he cried in the desert. Matthew 21:43: "the kingdom of God shall be taken away from you, and shall be given to a nation yielding its fruits." Likewise, by the desert Judea is understood, which was already deserted; Matthew 23:38: "behold your house shall be left to you desolate." He cried therefore "in the desert," that is, in Judea, so that by this it might be given to understand that the people to whom he was preaching was already deserted by God; Psalm 62:3: "in a desert land, and where there is no way, and no water, so in the sanctuary have I appeared to you." But what does he cry? "Make straight the way of the Lord": because for this he was sent; Luke 1:76: "you, child, shall be called the prophet of the Most High, for you shall go before the face of the Lord to prepare his ways." Now the way prepared and made straight for receiving God is the way of justice, according to that of Isaiah 26:7: "the path of the just is right," and so on. For then the path of the just is right when the whole man is subjected to God, namely so that the intellect through faith, the will through love, the operation through obedience are made subject to God. And this, "as says Isaiah the prophet"; that is, as he foretold. As if to say: I am that one in whom these things are fulfilled.”

“We have here the testimony of John, which he delivered to the messengers who were sent from Jerusalem to examine him. Observe here, I. Who they were that sent to him, and who they were that were sent. 1. They that sent to him were the Jews at Jerusalem, the great sanhedrim or high-commission court, which sat at Jerusalem, and was the representative of the Jewish church, who took cognizance of all matters relating to religion. One would think that they who were the fountains of learning, and the guides of the church, should have, by books, understood the times so well as to know that the Messiah was at hand, and therefore should presently have known him that was his forerunner, and readily embraced him; but, instead of this, they sent messengers to cross questions with him. Secular learning, honour, and power, seldom dispose men's minds to the reception of divine light. 2. They that were sent were, (1.) Priests and Levites, probably members of the council, men of learning, gravity, and authority. John Baptist was himself a priest of the seed of Aaron, and therefore it was not fit that he should be examined by any but priests. It was prophesied concerning John's ministry that it should purify the Sons of Levi (Mal 3:3), and therefore they were jealous of him and his reformation. (2.) They were of the Pharisees, proud, self-justiciaries, that thought they needed no repentance, and therefore could not bear one that made it his business to preach repentance. II. On what errand they were sent; it was to enquire concerning John and his baptism. They did not send for John to them, probably because they feared the people, lest the people where John was should be provoked to rise, or lest the people where they were should be brought acquainted with him; they thought it was good to keep him at a distance. They enquire concerning him, 1. To satisfy their curiosity; as the Athenians enquired concerning Paul's doctrine, for the novelty of it, Act 17:19, Act 17:20. Such a proud conceit they had of themselves that the doctrine of repentance was to them strange doctrine. 2. It was to show their authority. They thought they looked great when they called him to account whom all men counted as a prophet, and arraigned him at their bar. 3. It was with a design to suppress him and silence him if they could find any colour for it; for they were jealous of his growing interest, and his ministry agreed neither with the Mosaic dispensation which they had been long under, nor with the notions they had formed of the Messiah's kingdom. III. What was the answer he gave them, and his account, both concerning himself and concerning his baptism, in both which he witnessed to Christ. 1. Concerning himself, and what he professed himself to be. They asked him, Su tis ei - Thou, who art thou? John's appearing in the world was surprising. He was in the wilderness till the day of his showing unto Israel. His spirit, his converse, he doctrine, had something in them which commanded and gained respect; but he did not, as seducers do, give out himself to be some great one. He was more industrious to do good than to appear great; and therefore waived saying any thing of himself till he was legally interrogated. Those speak best for Christ that say least of themselves, whose own works praise them, not their own lips. He answers their interrogatory, (1.) Negatively. He was not that great one whom some took him to be. God's faithful witnesses stand more upon their guard against undue respect than against unjust contempt. Paul writes as warmly against those that overvalued him, and said, I am of Paul, as against those that undervalued him, and said that his bodily presence was weak; and he rent his clothes when he was called a god. [1.] John disowns himself to be the Christ (Joh 1:20): He said, I am not the Christ, who was now expected and waited for. Note, The ministers of Christ must remember that they are not Christ, and therefore must not usurp his powers and prerogatives, nor assume the praises due to him only. They are not Christ, and therefore must not lord it over God's heritage, nor pretend to a dominion over the faith of Christians. They cannot created grace and peace; they cannot enlighten, convert, quicken, comfort; for they are not Christ. Observe how emphatically this is here expressed concerning John: He confessed, and denied not, but confessed; it denotes his vehemence and constancy in making this protestation. Note, Temptations to pride, and assuming that honour to ourselves which does not belong to us, ought to be resisted with a great deal of vigour and earnestness. When John was taken to be the Messiah, he did not connive at it with a Si populus vult decipi, decipiatur - If the people will be deceived, let them; but openly and solemnly, without any ambiguities, confessed, I am not the Christ; hoti ouk eimi egō ho Christos - I am not the Christ, not I; another is at hand, who is he, but I am not. His disowning himself to be the Christ is called his confessing and not denying Christ. Note, Those that humble and abase themselves thereby confess Christ, and give honour to him; but those that will not deny themselves do in effect deny Christ, [2.] He disowns himself to be Elias, Joh 1:21. The Jews expected the person of Elias to return from heaven, and to live among them, and promised themselves great things from it. Hearing of John's character, doctrine, and baptism, and observing that he appeared as one dropped from heaven, in the same part of the country from which Elijah was carried to heaven, it is no wonder that they were ready to take him for this Elijah; but he disowned this honour too. He was indeed prophesied of under the name of Elijah (Mal 4:5), and he came in the spirit and power of Elias (Luk 1:17), and was the Elias that was to come (Mat 11:14); but he was not the person of Elias, not that Elias that went to heaven in the fiery chariot, as he was that met Christ in his transfiguration. He was the Elias that God had promised, not the Elias that they foolishly dreamed of. Elias did come, and they knew him not (Mat 17:12); nor did he make himself known to them as the Elias, because they had promised themselves such an Elias as God never promised them. [3.] He disowns himself to be that prophet, or the prophet. First, He was not that prophet which Moses said the Lord would raise up to them of their brethren, like unto him. If they meant this, they needed not ask that question, for that prophet was no other than the Messiah, and he had said already, I am not the Christ. Secondly, He was not such a prophet as they expected and wished for, who, like Samuel and Elijah, and some other of the prophets, would interpose in public affairs, and rescue them from under the Roman yoke. Thirdly, He was not one of the old prophets raised from the dead, as they expected one to come before Elias, as Elias before the Messiah. Fourthly, Though John was a prophet, yea, more than a prophet, yet he had his revelation, not by dreams and visions, as the Old Testament prophets had theirs; his commission and work were of another nature, and belonged to another dispensation. If John had said that he was Elias, and was a prophet, he might have made his words good; but ministers must, upon all occasions, express themselves with the utmost caution, both that they may not confirm people in any mistakes, and particularly that they may not give occasion to any to think of them above what is meet. (2.) Affirmatively. The committee that was sent to examine him pressed for a positive answer (Joh 1:22), urging the authority of those that sent them, which they expected he should pay a deference to: "Tell us, What art thou? not that we may believe thee, and be baptized by three, but that we may give an answer to those that sent us, and that it may not be said we were sent on a fool's errand." John was looked upon as a man of sincerity, and therefore they believed he would not give an evasive ambiguous answer; but would be fair and above-board, and give a plain answer to a plain question: What sayest thou of thyself? And he did so, I am the voice of one crying in the wilderness. Observe, [1.] He gives his answer in the words of scripture, to show that the scripture was fulfilled in him, and that his office was supported by a divine authority. What the scripture saith of the office of the ministry should be often thought of by those of that high calling, who must look upon themselves as that, and that only, which the word of God makes them. [2.] He gives in his answer in very humble, modest, self-denying expressions. He chooses to apply that scripture to himself which denotes not his dignity, but his duty and dependence, which bespeaks him little: I am the voice, as if he were vox et praeterea nihil - mere voice. [3.] He gives such an account of himself as might be profitable to them, and might excite and awaken them to hearken to him; for he was the voice (see Isa 40:3), a voice to alarm, an articulate voice to instruct. Ministers are but the voice, the vehicle, by which God is pleased to communicate his mind. What are Paul and Apollos but messengers? Observe, First, He was a human voice. The people were prepared to receive the law by the voice of thunders, and a trumpet exceedingly loud, such as made them tremble; but they were prepared for the gospel by the voice of a man like ourselves, a still small voice, such as that in which God came to Elijah, Kg1 19:12. Secondly, He was the voice of one crying, which denotes, 1. His earnestness and importunity in calling people to repentance; he cried aloud, and did not spare. Ministers must preach as those that are in earnest, and are themselves affected with those things with which they desire to affect others. Those words are not likely to thaw the hearers' hearts that freeze between the speaker's lips. 2. His open publication of the doctrine he preached; he was the voice of one crying, that all manner of persons might hear and take notice. Doth not wisdom cry? Pro 8:1. Thirdly, It was in the wilderness that this voice was crying; in a place of silence and solitude, out of the noise of the world and the hurry of its business; the more retired we are from the tumult of secular affairs the better prepared we are to hear from God. Fourthly, That which he cried was, Make straight the way of the Lord; that is, 1. He came to rectify the mistakes of people concerning the ways of God; it is certain that they are right ways, but the scribes and Pharisees, with their corrupt glosses upon the law, had made them crooked. Now John Baptist calls people to return to the original rule. 2. He came to prepare and dispose people for the reception and entertainment of Christ and his gospel. It is an allusion to the harbingers of a prince or great man, that cry, Make room. Note, When God is coming towards us, we must prepare to meet him, and let the word of the Lord have free course. See Psa 24:7. 2. Here is his testimony concerning his baptism. (1.) The enquiry which the committee made about it: Why baptizest thou, if thou be not the Christ, nor Elias, nor that prophet? Joh 1:25. [1.] They readily apprehended baptism to be fitly and properly used as a sacred rite or ceremony, for the Jewish church had used it with circumcision in the admission of proselytes, to signify the cleansing of them from the pollutions of their former state. That sign was made use of in the Christian church, that it might be the more passable. Christ did not affect novelty, nor should his ministers. [2.] They expected it would be used in the days of the Messiah, because it was promised that then there should be a fountain opened (Zac 13:1), and clean water sprinkled, Eze 36:25. It is taken for granted that Christ, and Elias, and that prophet, would baptize, when they came to purify a polluted world. Divine justice drowned the old world in its filth, but divine grace has provided for the cleansing of this new world from its filth. [3.] They would therefore know by what authority John baptized. His denying himself to be Elias, or that prophet, subjected him to this further question, Why baptizest thou? Note, It is no new thing for a man's modesty to be turned against him, and improved to his prejudice; but it is better that men should take advantage of our low thoughts of ourselves, to trample upon us, than the devil take advantage of our high thoughts of ourselves, to tempt us to pride and draw us into his condemnation. (2.) The account he gave of it, Joh 1:26, Joh 1:27. [1.] He owned himself to be only the minister of the outward sign: "I baptize with water, and that is all; I am no more, and do no more, than what you see; I have no other title than John the Baptist; I cannot confer the spiritual grace signified by it." Paul was in care that none should think of him above what they saw him to be (Co2 12:6); so was John Baptist. Ministers must not set up for masters. [2.] He directed them to one who was greater than himself, and would do that for them, if they pleased, which he could not do: "I baptize with water, and that is the utmost of my commission; I have nothing to do but by this to lead you to one that comes after me, and consign you to him." Note, The great business of Christ's ministers is to direct all people to him; we preach not ourselves, but Christ Jesus the Lord. John gave the same account to this committee that he had given to the people (Joh 1:15): This as he of whom I spoke. John was constant and uniform in his testimony, not as a reed shaken with the wind. The sanhedrim were jealous of his interest in the people, but he is not afraid to tell them that there is one at the door that will go beyond him. First, He tells them of Christ's presence among them now at this time: There stands one among you, at this time, whom you know not. Christ stood among the common people, and was as one of them. Note, 1. Much true worth lies hid in this world; obscurity is often the lot of real excellency. Saints are God's hidden ones, therefore the world knows them not. 2. God himself is often nearer to us than we are aware of. The Lord is in this place, and I knew it not. They were gazing, in expectation of the messiah: Lo he is here, or he is there, when the kingdom of God was abroad and already among them, Luk 17:21. Secondly, He tells them of Christ's preference above himself: He comes after me, and yet is preferred before me. This he had said before; he adds here, "Whose shoe-latchet I am not worthy to loose; I am not fit to be named the same day with him; it is an honour too great for me to pretend to be in the meanest office about him," Sa1 25:41. Those to whom Christ is precious reckon his service, even the most despised instances of it, an honour to them. See Psa 84:10. If so great a man as John accounted himself unworthy of the honour of being near Christ, how unworthy then should we account ourselves! Now, one would think, these chief priests and Pharisees, upon this intimation given concerning the approach of the Messiah, should presently have asked who, and where, this excellent person was; and who more likely to tell them than he who had given them this general notice? No, they did not think this any part of their business or concern; they came to molest John, not to receive any instructions from him: so that their ignorance was wilful; they might have known Christ, and would not. Lastly, Notice is taken of the place where all this was done: In Bethabara beyond Jordan, Joh 1:28. Bethabara signifies the house of passage; some think it was the very place where Israel passed over Jordan into the land of promise under the conduct of Joshua; there was opened the way into the gospel state by Jesus Christ. It was at a great distance from Jerusalem, beyond Jordan; probably because what he did there would be least offensive to the government. Amos must go prophesy in the country, not near the court; but it was sad that Jerusalem should put so far from her the things that belonged to her peace. He made this confession in the same place where he was baptizing, that all those who attended his baptism might be witnesses of it, and none might say that they knew not what to make of him.”

“And this is the record of John,.... The evangelist proceeds to give a large, and full account of the testimony John the Baptist bore to Christ, which he had hinted at before, and had signified was his work, and office, and the end of his being sent, When the Jews sent priests and Levites from Jerusalem, to ask him, who art thou? The Jews that sent were the great sanhedrim that sat at Jerusalem, whose business it was to inquire into, examine, and try prophets, whether true or false (p); and John appearing as a prophet, and being so esteemed by the people, they deputed messengers to him to interrogate him, and know who he was. The persons sent were very likely of their own body, since priests and Levites were in that council. For it is said (q), "they do not constitute, or appoint in the sanhedrim but priests, Levites, and Israelites, who have their genealogies---and it is commanded, that there should be in the great sanhedrim priests and Levites, as it is said, Deu 17:9 "and thou shalt come unto the priests, the Levites", &c. and if they are not to be found, though they are all Israelites, (not of the tribe of Levi,) it is right. Such a sanhedrim is a lawful one; but priests and Levites, if such could be found, that had proper qualifications, were to be admitted in the first place. A message from so august an assembly, at so great a distance, (for Jordan was a day's journey distant from Jerusalem (r); according to Josephus (s), it was 210 furlongs, or 26 miles and a quarter,) and by the hands of persons of such character and figure, was doing John a great deal of honour, and serves to make his testimony of Christ the more public and remarkable; and it also shows what a noise John's ministry and baptism made among the Jews, that it even reached Jerusalem, and the great council of the nation; and likewise the question put to him, which by John's answer seems to intimate as if it was thought he was the Messiah, shows the opinion that was entertained of him, and even the sanhedrim might not be without thoughts this way: and the question they put by their messengers might not be, as some have thought, to ensnare John, nor out of disrespect to Jesus, who, as yet, was not made manifest; but might be in good earnest, having, from many circumstances, reason to think there might be something in the people's opinion of him; since, though the government was not wholly departed from Judah, yet they could not but observe it was going away apace, an Idumean having been upon the throne for some years, placed there by the Roman senate; and now the government was divided among his sons by the same order; Daniel's weeks they could not but see were just accomplishing; and besides, from the uncommon appearance John made, the austerity of his life; the doctrine of remission of sins he preached, and the new ordinance of baptism he administered, they might be ready to conclude he was the person, (p) Misn. Sanhedrin, c. 1. sect. 5. (q) Maimon. Hilch. Sanhedrin, c. 2. sect. 1, 2. (r) Misna Maaser Sheni, c. 5. sect. 2. Juchasin, fol. 65. 2. Jarchi in Isa. xxiv. 16. (s) De Bello Jud. l. 5. c. 4.”

“The Jews sent, &c. These men, who were priests and Levites, seem to have been sent and deputed by the sanhedrim, or great council at Jerusalem, to ask of John the Baptist, who was then in great esteem and veneration, whether he was not their Messias; who, as they knew by the predictions of the prophets, was to come about that time. John declared to them he was not. To their next question, if he was not Elias? He answered: he was not: because in person he was not; though our Saviour (Matthew xi. 14.) says he was Elias: to wit, in spirit and office only. Their third question was, if he was a prophet? He answered, no. Yet Christ (Matthew xi.) tells us, he was a prophet, and more than a prophet. In the ordinary acceptation only, they were called prophets who foretold things to come: John then, with truth, as well as humility, could say he was not a prophet; not being sent to foretell the coming of the Messias, but to point him out as already come, and present with the Jews. (Witham)”