Advent 2 ::: Matthew 3: 1-12

In those days John the Baptist appeared in the wilderness of Judea, proclaiming, ²“Repent, for the kingdom of heaven has come near.” ³This is the one of whom the prophet Isaiah spoke when he said, “The voice of one crying out in the wilderness: ‘Prepare the way of the Lord, make his paths straight.’” ⁴Now John wore clothing of camel’s hair with a leather belt around his waist, and his food was locusts and wild honey. ⁵Then the people of Jerusalem and all Judea were going out to him, and all the region along the Jordan, ⁶and they were baptized by him in the river Jordan, confessing their sins.

⁷But when he saw many Pharisees and Sadducees coming for baptism, he said to them, “You brood of vipers! Who warned you to flee from the wrath to come? ⁸Bear fruit worthy of repentance. ⁹Do not presume to say to yourselves, ‘We have Abraham as our ancestor’; for I tell you, God is able from these stones to raise up children to Abraham. ¹⁰Even now the ax is lying at the root of the trees; every tree therefore that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. ¹¹“I baptize you with water for repentance, but one who is more powerful than I is coming after me; I am not worthy to carry his sandals. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire. ¹²His winnowing fork is in his hand, and he will clear his threshing floor and will gather his wheat into the granary; but the chaff he will burn with unquenchable fire.”

Translation:  But in those days, John the Baptist comes near, proclaiming in the wilderness of Judea, saying, "Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand, for this is the one spoken of through the Isaiah the prophet when he said, 'A voice crying in the wilderness, prepare the way of the Lord, makes his paths straight.'" 

But John himself had his garment of camel hair and a leather girdle around his loins and his food was locusts and wild honey.  Then Jerusalem was going out to him, and all Judea, and all the region around the Jordan, and they were baptized by him in the Jordan River, confessing their sins. 

But when he saw many of the pharisees and Sadducees coming upon the baptism, he said to them, "You children of snakes, who warned you to flee from the coming wrath?  Produce fruit, therefore, worthy of repentance. and do not think to say in yourselves, 'We have Abraham as father,' for I say to you that out of these stones God is able to raise up children to Abraham.  But now the ax is laid to the root of the trees.  Therefore, every tree not producing good fruit is being cut down and is being thrown into fire."

I indeed baptize you in water into repentance, but the one coming after me is more powerful than me, whose shoes I am not adequate to carry.  He will baptize you in Holy Spirit and fire, whose winnowing shovel (is) in his hand, and he will thoroughly purge his threshing floor and will gather together his wheat into the storehouse, but the chaff he will burn with unquenchable fire."

Background and situation:  Our lection has its' source in Mark and Q.  Matthew 3:1-6 is parallel to Mark 1:2-6.  At 3:7, however, Matthew switches to Q--3:7-10 is parallel to Luke 3:7-9--then returns to Mark.  (Matthew 3:11-12 is parallel to Mark 1:7-8.)

Matthew makes several changes to Mark.  The most striking change is that Matthew puts Jesus' Markan speech (Mark 1: 15), or at least part of it, into the mouth of John the Baptist:  "Repent, for the kingdom of heaven has come near." 

Secondly, though Mark says he is quoting Isaiah in Mark 1:2, he is actually quoting both Malachi and Isaiah.  (The portion in Mark that reads "I am sending my messenger" is from Malachi 3: 1).  The punctilious Matthew removes the Malachi portion of the quotation. 

Third, and most tellingly, Matthew removes Mark's description of John's baptism--"a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins"--and says simply that John baptized people who also confessed their sins.  For Matthew, forgiveness of sins comes only through Jesus.  Forgiveness is through the eucharist (26:28), and not from John's baptism. 

Fourth, Matthew adds that not only did people go to John from Jerusalem and Judea, but also "the region along the Jordan" as well.  For Matthew, John's appeal is extended northward, even to Samaria, perhaps even to Galilee.

That "region along the Jordan":  One wonders at Matthew's insertion of the phrase "region along the Jordan."  Then we remember:  The Jordan is the place where Joshua and the Israelites crossed into the Promised Land over 1000 years prior.  Is Matthew recalling the Canaanite resistance to this encroachment? 

Matthew will explicitly use the word "Canaanite" in the story of the "Canaanite woman" in 15: 21-28.  Mark has "syrophoenician woman" which Matthew deliberately changed to "Canaanite," a word that had not been used for centuries. 

In doing so, Matthew is using a word associated with an ancient enemy of Israel.  Is his inclusion of the "region along the Jordan" a signal that the "kingdom of heaven" includes even Canaanites and--gasp!--the Samaritans who currently live in that region?

Matthew's view of John the baptist:  John is presented as a prophetic figure, dressed like Elijah (2 Kings 1: 8), an association that Matthew will repeat in 11:14 and 17: 11-13.  That he ate a diet of "locusts and wild honey" means that he received his sustenance directly from God as did the Hebrews when they wandered in the wilderness after the Exodus.

3:7:  But when he saw many of the pharisees and Sadducees coming upon the baptism, he said to them, "You children of snakes, who warned you to flee from the coming wrath?  Produce fruit, therefore, worthy of repentance. and do not think to say in yourselves, 'We have Abraham as father,' for I say to you that out of these stones God is able to raise up children to Abraham." 

With verse 7, Matthew switches from Mark to Q as his primary source.  Luke is word-for-word the same, except that, in Luke, John addresses "the multitudes," while in Matthew, John addresses the "pharisees and Sadducees."  In Luke, John's "shape up" message is for everybody.  In Matthew, it's focused on the religious leadership.  

Matthew lumps them together, but actually pharisees and Sadducees had some considerable points of conflict.  They had differences of class, theology, and politics.  In regard to class, the Sadducees lived high on the hog in fancy digs in Jerusalem.  The pharisees were more modest in their lifestyle.  The Sadducees admired Hellenistic culture;  the pharisees did not.

In theology, Sadducees believed in a narrow definition of Torah, only that which was actually written in the five books of Moses.  The pharisees believed that God had also given an "oral law" to Moses on Mt. Sinai.  The Sadducees also did not believe in a general resurrection of the dead, while the pharisees did. 

Politically, the Sadducees constituted about two-thirds of the Jerusalem ruling council in the time of Jesus, while the pharisees made up one-third.  Later, the Sadducees would be decimated when the Temple was destroyed and were no more.  After AD 70, the pharisees were the new "establishment," and re-wrote the history of the Sanhedrin to show that they were really in charge all along.

As for Matthew's purposes, note that this is the first appearance of pharisees and Sadducees in Matthew's gospel.  They will be his primary opponents throughout Matthew, and they enter the story as paired together.  Historically, as noted, there were several prickly points of contention between pharisees and Sadducees.  They will be united, however, in their opposition of Jesus.

In true John the Baptist fashion, he lets them have it.  With his customary diplomacy, John calls them "children of snakes," the first-century equivalent of a cussing out.  They are claiming special privilege because they "have Abraham as (their) father."  They are, in other words, Chosen People through their hereditary connection to Abraham. 

In the "kingdom of heaven," all claims to special status are subverted.  The "kingdom of heaven," which is to come "on earth" (6:10), is about loving of enemies (6: 44)--Canaanites!?--which is how people become "children of (their) Father in heaven" (6:45). 

Claiming special status as Chosen People based on one's lineage through Abraham is countered with being a child of God, which claims no special status, and is marked by love towards outsiders.  This clash between hereditary privilege and the equality of all in the "kingdom of heaven" is a central conflict in the synoptic gospels, and is expanded upon even further in the fourth gospel.

There is no such thing as a "chosen people."  Lineage doesn't mean squat.  No one is more "special" than another, none more favored than another, none more privileged, none smarter, none holier.  There is no "master race."

John the Baptist tells the pharisees and Sadducees to "bear fruit worthy of repentance."  "Fruit" is an important image in the New Testament, and particularly in Matthew.  It means to show forth signs of a changed life, one that now works toward the purposes of God.  To paraphrase, John tells the religious leadership:  "Show that you've really changed (metanoias) by acting differently in the world."  Conversely:  "If you don't, you're going into the fire."

John the Lesser:

I indeed baptize you in water into repentance, but the one coming after me is more powerful than me, whose shoes I am not adequate to carry.  He will baptize you in Holy Spirit and fire, whose winnowing shovel (is) in his hand, and he will thoroughly purge his threshing floor and will gather together his wheat into the storehouse, but the chaff he will burn with unquenchable fire."

The very early church was careful to make clear that John was subordinate to Jesus.  In his time, John appears to have been well-known throughout the region.  Herod Antipas, the local king in Galilee, knew of him and eventually killed him, after which the crowds, and even Herod, confused Jesus with John the Baptist come back from the dead.   

This may have been a sensitive point in the early church.  That Jesus was baptized by John is attested by all four gospel writers.  One notes, however, that the actual baptism is narrated in the passive voice in Mark and Matthew, that Luke is unclear about who actually baptized Jesus, and the fourth gospel does not mention the actual baptism at all.

The early church had to deal with the fact that Jesus entered into public ministry as something of a follower of the Baptist.  The gospel writers always affirm a connection between John and Jesus, provided it is understood that John is the lesser figure.

There were, of course, a number of similarities between the two.  Both were preachers, both preached repentance, both were mavericks, both were connected with wilderness.  Where John is a stationary figure located in the wilderness, however, Jesus travels throughout the region.  People come to John, in other words, while Jesus goes to the people.

The "winnowing-fork" of verse 12 should be translated as "winnowing shovel" (ptuon).  The verse is not about separating out the wheat from the chaff, as it commonly supposed, but rather "shoveling" up the wheat and the chaff together.  Thus far, John has the ministry of Jesus exactly right.  Jesus will gather both the wheat and the chaff.

Where he gets it wrong is in saying that Jesus will save the wheat and burn up the chaff.  That is not what Jesus would do, and here is where Jesus advances beyond John.  This appears to confuse John, and later, in chapter 11, he will wonder if Jesus is really the one to come.  Jesus responds with the very definition of "fruit": 

‘Go and tell John what you hear and see: ⁵the blind receive their sight, the lame walk, the lepers are cleansed, the deaf hear, the dead are raised, and the poor have good news brought to them.⁶And blessed is anyone who takes no offence at me.’

Maybe it's a good cop/bad cop kind of thing that reflects a tension that runs all through Matthew's gospel.  Matthew, more than any other gospel, is concerned about "righteousness"-- repentance, right action, justice, bearing fruit--and the punishment that awaits those who don't get it or do it. 

At the same time, Matthew undermines that same position as often as he affirms it.  As one example, only Matthew tells the story of the Laborers in the Vineyard with its radical vision of universal equality.

John represents one side of the argument, the punishment that awaits those who don't get it right.  This is a judgment that Matthew calls us to take seriously.  This judgment, however, is countered--and exceeded--by the ministry of Jesus wherein the unloveable are loved, the outcasts accepted, and sinners party with God. 

Image:  Jesus meets John, Malaika Favorite

In those days John the Baptist appeared in the wilderness of Judea, proclaiming, ²“Repent, for the kingdom of heaven has come near.” ³This is the one of whom the prophet Isaiah spoke when he said, “The voice of one crying out in the wilderness: ‘Prepare the way of the Lord, make his paths straight.’” ⁴Now John wore clothing of camel’s hair with a leather belt around his waist, and his food was locusts and wild honey. ⁵Then the people of Jerusalem and all Judea were going out to him, and all the region along the Jordan, ⁶and they were baptized by him in the river Jordan, confessing their sins.

⁷But when he saw many Pharisees and Sadducees coming for baptism, he said to them, “You brood of vipers! Who warned you to flee from the wrath to come? ⁸Bear fruit worthy of repentance. ⁹Do not presume to say to yourselves, ‘We have Abraham as our ancestor’; for I tell you, God is able from these stones to raise up children to Abraham. ¹⁰Even now the ax is lying at the root of the trees; every tree therefore that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. ¹¹“I baptize you with water for repentance, but one who is more powerful than I is coming after me; I am not worthy to carry his sandals. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire. ¹²His winnowing fork is in his hand, and he will clear his threshing floor and will gather his wheat into the granary; but the chaff he will burn with unquenchable fire.”

Translation:  But in those days, John the Baptist comes near, proclaiming in the wilderness of Judea, saying, "Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand, for this is the one spoken of through the Isaiah the prophet when he said, 'A voice crying in the wilderness, prepare the way of the Lord, makes his paths straight.'" 

But John himself had his garment of camel hair and a leather girdle around his loins and his food was locusts and wild honey.  Then Jerusalem was going out to him, and all Judea, and all the region around the Jordan, and they were baptized by him in the Jordan River, confessing their sins. 

But when he saw many of the pharisees and Sadducees coming upon the baptism, he said to them, "You children of snakes, who warned you to flee from the coming wrath?  Produce fruit, therefore, worthy of repentance. and do not think to say in yourselves, 'We have Abraham as father,' for I say to you that out of these stones God is able to raise up children to Abraham.  But now the ax is laid to the root of the trees.  Therefore, every tree not producing good fruit is being cut down and is being thrown into fire."

I indeed baptize you in water into repentance, but the one coming after me is more powerful than me, whose shoes I am not adequate to carry.  He will baptize you in Holy Spirit and fire, whose winnowing shovel (is) in his hand, and he will thoroughly purge his threshing floor and will gather together his wheat into the storehouse, but the chaff he will burn with unquenchable fire."

Background and situation:  Our lection has its' source in Mark and Q.  Matthew 3:1-6 is parallel to Mark 1:2-6.  At 3:7, however, Matthew switches to Q--3:7-10 is parallel to Luke 3:7-9--then returns to Mark.  (Matthew 3:11-12 is parallel to Mark 1:7-8.)

Matthew makes several changes to Mark.  The most striking change is that Matthew puts Jesus' Markan speech (Mark 1: 15), or at least part of it, into the mouth of John the Baptist:  "Repent, for the kingdom of heaven has come near." 

Secondly, though Mark says he is quoting Isaiah in Mark 1:2, he is actually quoting both Malachi and Isaiah.  (The portion in Mark that reads "I am sending my messenger" is from Malachi 3: 1).  The punctilious Matthew removes the Malachi portion of the quotation. 

Third, and most tellingly, Matthew removes Mark's description of John's baptism--"a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins"--and says simply that John baptized people who also confessed their sins.  For Matthew, forgiveness of sins comes only through Jesus.  Forgiveness is through the eucharist (26:28), and not from John's baptism. 

Fourth, Matthew adds that not only did people go to John from Jerusalem and Judea, but also "the region along the Jordan" as well.  For Matthew, John's appeal is extended northward, even to Samaria, perhaps even to Galilee.

That "region along the Jordan":  One wonders at Matthew's insertion of the phrase "region along the Jordan."  Then we remember:  The Jordan is the place where Joshua and the Israelites crossed into the Promised Land over 1000 years prior.  Is Matthew recalling the Canaanite resistance to this encroachment? 

Matthew will explicitly use the word "Canaanite" in the story of the "Canaanite woman" in 15: 21-28.  Mark has "syrophoenician woman" which Matthew deliberately changed to "Canaanite," a word that had not been used for centuries. 

In doing so, Matthew is using a word associated with an ancient enemy of Israel.  Is his inclusion of the "region along the Jordan" a signal that the "kingdom of heaven" includes even Canaanites and--gasp!--the Samaritans who currently live in that region?

Matthew's view of John the baptist:  John is presented as a prophetic figure, dressed like Elijah (2 Kings 1: 8), an association that Matthew will repeat in 11:14 and 17: 11-13.  That he ate a diet of "locusts and wild honey" means that he received his sustenance directly from God as did the Hebrews when they wandered in the wilderness after the Exodus.

3:7:  But when he saw many of the pharisees and Sadducees coming upon the baptism, he said to them, "You children of snakes, who warned you to flee from the coming wrath?  Produce fruit, therefore, worthy of repentance. and do not think to say in yourselves, 'We have Abraham as father,' for I say to you that out of these stones God is able to raise up children to Abraham." 

With verse 7, Matthew switches from Mark to Q as his primary source.  Luke is word-for-word the same, except that, in Luke, John addresses "the multitudes," while in Matthew, John addresses the "pharisees and Sadducees."  In Luke, John's "shape up" message is for everybody.  In Matthew, it's focused on the religious leadership.  

Matthew lumps them together, but actually pharisees and Sadducees had some considerable points of conflict.  They had differences of class, theology, and politics.  In regard to class, the Sadducees lived high on the hog in fancy digs in Jerusalem.  The pharisees were more modest in their lifestyle.  The Sadducees admired Hellenistic culture;  the pharisees did not.

In theology, Sadducees believed in a narrow definition of Torah, only that which was actually written in the five books of Moses.  The pharisees believed that God had also given an "oral law" to Moses on Mt. Sinai.  The Sadducees also did not believe in a general resurrection of the dead, while the pharisees did. 

Politically, the Sadducees constituted about two-thirds of the Jerusalem ruling council in the time of Jesus, while the pharisees made up one-third.  Later, the Sadducees would be decimated when the Temple was destroyed and were no more.  After AD 70, the pharisees were the new "establishment," and re-wrote the history of the Sanhedrin to show that they were really in charge all along.

As for Matthew's purposes, note that this is the first appearance of pharisees and Sadducees in Matthew's gospel.  They will be his primary opponents throughout Matthew, and they enter the story as paired together.  Historically, as noted, there were several prickly points of contention between pharisees and Sadducees.  They will be united, however, in their opposition of Jesus.

In true John the Baptist fashion, he lets them have it.  With his customary diplomacy, John calls them "children of snakes," the first-century equivalent of a cussing out.  They are claiming special privilege because they "have Abraham as (their) father."  They are, in other words, Chosen People through their hereditary connection to Abraham. 

In the "kingdom of heaven," all claims to special status are subverted.  The "kingdom of heaven," which is to come "on earth" (6:10), is about loving of enemies (6: 44)--Canaanites!?--which is how people become "children of (their) Father in heaven" (6:45). 

Claiming special status as Chosen People based on one's lineage through Abraham is countered with being a child of God, which claims no special status, and is marked by love towards outsiders.  This clash between hereditary privilege and the equality of all in the "kingdom of heaven" is a central conflict in the synoptic gospels, and is expanded upon even further in the fourth gospel.

There is no such thing as a "chosen people."  Lineage doesn't mean squat.  No one is more "special" than another, none more favored than another, none more privileged, none smarter, none holier.  There is no "master race."

John the Baptist tells the pharisees and Sadducees to "bear fruit worthy of repentance."  "Fruit" is an important image in the New Testament, and particularly in Matthew.  It means to show forth signs of a changed life, one that now works toward the purposes of God.  To paraphrase, John tells the religious leadership:  "Show that you've really changed (metanoias) by acting differently in the world."  Conversely:  "If you don't, you're going into the fire."

John the Lesser:

I indeed baptize you in water into repentance, but the one coming after me is more powerful than me, whose shoes I am not adequate to carry.  He will baptize you in Holy Spirit and fire, whose winnowing shovel (is) in his hand, and he will thoroughly purge his threshing floor and will gather together his wheat into the storehouse, but the chaff he will burn with unquenchable fire."

The very early church was careful to make clear that John was subordinate to Jesus.  In his time, John appears to have been well-known throughout the region.  Herod Antipas, the local king in Galilee, knew of him and eventually killed him, after which the crowds, and even Herod, confused Jesus with John the Baptist come back from the dead.   

This may have been a sensitive point in the early church.  That Jesus was baptized by John is attested by all four gospel writers.  One notes, however, that the actual baptism is narrated in the passive voice in Mark and Matthew, that Luke is unclear about who actually baptized Jesus, and the fourth gospel does not mention the actual baptism at all.

The early church had to deal with the fact that Jesus entered into public ministry as something of a follower of the Baptist.  The gospel writers always affirm a connection between John and Jesus, provided it is understood that John is the lesser figure.

There were, of course, a number of similarities between the two.  Both were preachers, both preached repentance, both were mavericks, both were connected with wilderness.  Where John is a stationary figure located in the wilderness, however, Jesus travels throughout the region.  People come to John, in other words, while Jesus goes to the people.

The "winnowing-fork" of verse 12 should be translated as "winnowing shovel" (ptuon).  The verse is not about separating out the wheat from the chaff, as it commonly supposed, but rather "shoveling" up the wheat and the chaff together.  Thus far, John has the ministry of Jesus exactly right.  Jesus will gather both the wheat and the chaff.

Where he gets it wrong is in saying that Jesus will save the wheat and burn up the chaff.  That is not what Jesus would do, and here is where Jesus advances beyond John.  This appears to confuse John, and later, in chapter 11, he will wonder if Jesus is really the one to come.  Jesus responds with the very definition of "fruit": 

‘Go and tell John what you hear and see: ⁵the blind receive their sight, the lame walk, the lepers are cleansed, the deaf hear, the dead are raised, and the poor have good news brought to them.⁶And blessed is anyone who takes no offence at me.’

Maybe it's a good cop/bad cop kind of thing that reflects a tension that runs all through Matthew's gospel.  Matthew, more than any other gospel, is concerned about "righteousness"-- repentance, right action, justice, bearing fruit--and the punishment that awaits those who don't get it or do it. 

At the same time, Matthew undermines that same position as often as he affirms it.  As one example, only Matthew tells the story of the Laborers in the Vineyard with its radical vision of universal equality.

John represents one side of the argument, the punishment that awaits those who don't get it right.  This is a judgment that Matthew calls us to take seriously.  This judgment, however, is countered--and exceeded--by the ministry of Jesus wherein the unloveable are loved, the outcasts accepted, and sinners party with God. 

Image:  Jesus meets John, Malaika Favorite