Turn with me in your Bibles, please, to John 3, beginning at verse 25.
After this, Jesus and his disciples went into the Judean country, and he remained there with them and was baptized. John also was baptizing at Anan near Salom, because water was plentiful there, and people were coming and being baptized. For John had not yet been put in prison.
Now a discussion arose between some of John’s disciples and a Jew over purification, and they came to John and said to him, “Rabbi, he who was with you across the Jordan, to whom you bore witness, look, he is baptizing, and all are going to him.”
John answered, “A person cannot receive even one thing unless it is given him from Heaven. You yourselves bear me witness that I said, I am not the Christ, but I have been sent before him. The one who has the bride is the bridegroom. The friend of the bridegroom who stands and hears him rejoices greatly at the bridegroom’s voice; therefore, this joy of mine is now complete. He must increase, but I must decrease.”
This is the word of the Lord. Thanks be to God. Let us pray.
Heavenly Father, we thank you for your word. We ask that you open our hearts and our minds to hear you speak, to take it to heart, and let it guide us in our lives, helping us to live more holy and more pure before you. We pray this in Jesus’ name. Amen.
So following Nicodemus’ nighttime visit to Jesus, John’s Gospel gives us some other unique information about Jesus’s ministry. While the synoptic gospels jump straight from Jesus’s temptation in the wilderness by Satan into his Galilean ministry following the arrest of John the Baptist, John the Evangelist reminds us that there was also a period of ministry overlap between the Baptist and Jesus.
There was not an immediate easy one or the other transition; instead, the Evangelist suggests that in some ways the early part of Jesus’s ministry was similar to the Baptist’s. Yet Christ came to be recognized as being the greater when some people began viewing them as leading separate rival and competing ministries.
Now, unfortunately, the parenthetical note “for John had not yet been put in prison” raises questions about the chronology of Jesus’s ministry that we really can’t answer. Some have suggested that perhaps this latter portion of chapter 3 should be located at the end of chapter 1 because of its related content involving John the Baptist, but there is no manuscript evidence to support that suggestion. Another suggestion would be that the Baptist was imprisoned more than once, but that’s only pure supposition.
Considering this uncertainty, we just must remember that the gospel writers set out to tell a narrative and persuasive history of Jesus’s life and work and not to present an accurate timeline. That was just not how histories in the ancient world were written; detailed accuracy was not obligatory.
The most important point we should reasonably take from that remark is that everything prior to this point in John’s Gospel occurred sometime early on in Jesus’s ministry. This is provided merely as a time mark.
Now, the gospel writers were not preoccupied with recording the Baptist’s story because their subject was Jesus. The Baptist, as important as he was in preparing God’s people for Christ’s appearing, was not their focus. So he is only mentioned for how he supports Jesus. Beyond the few details about him in the gospels, there is no accurate timeline of his prophetic ministry recorded.
This passage reminds us that Jesus and John did not have just one single moment of intersection at his baptism; that was not an isolated incident. There was more continuity and a greater depth of relationship between Jesus and John than many Christians often realize. Yes, we know they were relatives, but they were also colleagues.
This builds up stronger evidence for practical continuity between Jews and Christians, between ancient Israel and the church, for our unity together as one whole people of God under one covenant of grace. Christians possess and accept the revelation of God’s Son, Jesus, as the Messiah, while Jews reject him, leading them to diverge from God’s truth and faith.
So this passage helps strengthen the case that the church is the continuation of Israel, not a replacement. The relationship between the Baptist and Jesus displays how the Old Testament is not separate or distinct from the new; the new builds on top of the old. The old revealed types and a shadow of the good things to come, while the new presents the true form of these realities.
This ultimately means that we cannot have a new testament without the old; that the gospel really can’t be received as good news without knowledge of the bad news—the law and our sinfulness.
Now here we’re told that Jesus had an otherwise undescribed period ministering in Judea distinctly and separately from his ministry in Galilee, but that does not mean that his teaching was any different, only that his audience, his expected audience, probably was.
During the first century, most of those living in closer proximity to Jerusalem were likely more religious, more wealthy, and more politically engaged, or they were in service of and supportive of those three categories above. Most Judeans who would have heard Jesus during this time would have been members of various different elite circles.
They would not have been the common folk like the poor and the downtrodden, because the lower classes could less afford the opportunity to go out to see Jesus. Though the elites would have been disinclined to hear and receive his gospel message, they probably lacked a felt need for it.
Does that not kind of sound like many people in America today? Most people are content and satisfied with the little bit that they have, as much as it is, but they are blind and ignorant to their spiritual and moral poverty because they are drowning in material wealth.
They were, and we are, in need of Jesus. Humanity is so easily enslaved to our own sin that we fail to recognize our chains or even care when we do, until or unless the Holy Spirit opens our eyes and our hearts.
So it is unsurprising that the writers of the synoptics ignore this period of Jesus’s life since there was so little immediate evidence of a response to it. But the book of Acts would seem to imply that Jesus’s Judean ministry did have a great impact, even though it took longer for the seeds of faith to germinate and bloom.
Now apparently it was during this season of ministry that Jesus and his disciples went out into the Judean countryside, and he remained there with them and was baptizing. Jesus and his disciples were baptizing people. This is the only place we see reference to them doing this. But we cannot presume that their baptizing was the same as what Jesus will later command in Matthew 28: “Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I’ve commanded you.”
Instead, based upon the discussion that follows, their baptizing was almost certainly more similar to John’s—a baptism of repentance, not a covenant sign and seal. Because if it had been something even more different or innovative than that of the Baptist, then it surely would have been recorded, if only because of the controversy it would have generated.
John the Evangelist here gives us more details which explain the location-based context for this. We see that at the close of chapter 2, Jesus was in Jerusalem celebrating the Passover when he performed a prophetic sign by driving out the money changers out of the temple courts.
Since we’re now being told that after this, Jesus and his disciples went to the Judean countryside out into the region surrounding Jerusalem, this suggests that Nicodemus’s visit to Jesus was during that Passover festival in Jerusalem. This implies that Nicodemus was more limited in his knowledge about Jesus’s works and miracles than we often assume.
Jesus would not yet have been widely known as a wonder-working rabbi from Galilee. Nicodemus would have only likely known about the incident at the temple for certain, but he may have heard rumors about the wine incident in Cana. Lastly, he may have also seen or heard the other signs that he was doing in Jerusalem during the feast.
So these are what would have prompted him to go to Jesus, saying, “Rabbi, we know that you are a teacher from God, for no one can do these signs unless God is with him.” Nicodemus was almost certainly an eyewitness to Jesus’s signs prior to his visit, explaining why he was being drawn to Jesus, because the fires of regenerating faith were beginning to burn.
Things soon after Nicodemus’s nighttime visit in Jerusalem during the Passover, Jesus and his disciples went out into the Judean wilderness and began preaching, teaching, and baptizing in a manner similar to the Baptist, but they were not with the Baptist.
Now, shifting over to John, a discussion arose between some of John’s disciples and a Jew over purification. What is it? Ritual purification was the purpose of their ceremonial washing, achieving a state of cleanness by the removal of spiritual impurity gained by contact with many ordinary things in life, impurities which impeded a person’s access to the Divine.
These washings are why there are so many mikvah (ritual baths) located near the Temple Mount for Jews to pass through on their way up to worship the only holy Sovereign God. This purification was not an issue of sin or sinfulness. Jews did not believe that these washings would remove their sin or its guilt; sacrifices were still required for that, but had become part of Torah obedience and apparently developed during the Hellenistic intertestamental period.
So we understand John’s baptism of repentance for forgiveness of sins as being an outgrowth or evolution from these ritual washings, as opposed to being something entirely new in Jewish religion. Just as Christian baptism is an outgrowth from John’s baptism, where it becomes a sign, a symbol, and a seal of the Holy Spirit’s regeneration—his washing of us with the blood of Christ to cleanse us truly of our sin by our faith in him, and as a visible sign of our admission into the Covenant of Grace and our adoption as children of God.
This debate and discussion about purification apparently dealt with what John’s baptism actually did and meant. Therefore, they went to their teacher to settle the question, for, Rabbi, the one who was with you across the Jordan to whom you bore witness, look, he’s baptizing, and now all are going to him.
Well, that’s not a question we would expect in concern about purity. It is reasonable because it implies that they believe the effectiveness of their purification was connected to the person doing the washing—something that we as Protestants and Presbyterians deny regarding the sacraments.
Their effectiveness does not depend on who administers them but on the Holy Spirit, who works faith within those who receives them. So it seems like what they were really debating was who gave the better bath.
The true question behind the question was whose baptism was better, John’s or Jesus’s? Whose was more effective? Which one made a person more pure?
See, their dispute also has an element of self-interest within it. Were they missing out on something more and better by not being baptized by Jesus? Or were they actually the better ones since they were remaining with the original baptism?
Certainly, John’s disciples were being jealous for his sake, his honor, glory, and popularity against this new-coming upstart Jesus, just as Jesus’s disciples would become jealous for his sake. Such as when the people in Samaria did not receive him because his face was set towards Jerusalem. His disciples, James and John, saw it and said, “Lord, do you want us to call fire to come down from heaven and consume them?”
But he, Jesus, turned and rebuked them. For nevertheless, the Evangelist will answer this for us later, clarifying in verse 42, saying that Jesus himself did not baptize, but only his disciples. So the baptism by Jesus’s disciples was really no better and probably no different than John’s.
In answering his disciples, the Baptist showed extraordinary self-awareness. He knew and understood precisely who he was and what he had been sent by God to do. He answered them, explaining what he understood and taught them: the attitude which they, and which we, should have whenever we meditate upon our relationship to Christ.
“A person cannot receive even one thing unless it is given him from heaven.”
So first, the Baptist reminded them that everything—all that we have—depends upon God’s providence. There is nothing we have that we did not first receive; therefore, we have no reason to boast or to be jealous.
“You yourselves bear witness that I said I am not the Christ, but I have been sent before him.”
Second, the Baptist reminds them of his own confession that he is not the Christ. See, John knew what his limitations were. He knew what his role was. He understood and accepted the simple fact that, no matter how great he might be, he would never be number one; he would always be number two when compared to Jesus Christ. Neither he nor we will ever be number one, and most of us will never even break into the top ten.
But once we realize and accept that fact, then it becomes easier to be satisfied and content with what we have, because our expectations in life become far more reasonable.
“The one who has the bride is the bridegroom. The friend of the bridegroom who stands and hears him rejoices greatly at the bridegroom’s voice; therefore this joy of mine is now complete.”
Third, the Baptist uses the analogy of a wedding to describe his role. He was like the best man at a wedding. The friend of the bridegroom’s job, within their context, was to help the groom with all of their wedding preparations.
Because the man’s job in those days was to stand in support of the groom as a witness in defense of his marriage and its consummation. The final and most important duty of this friend was to guard, guide, and lead the bride to her bridal chamber with the groom, patiently waiting.
Furthermore, this metaphor of marriage is used throughout scripture to describe the relationship between God and his chosen people. This metaphor reminds us that just as a marriage is a binding covenant between a man and a woman, the Lord has bound himself to his chosen people in covenant.
While it may also be understood and interpreted literally, the Song of Songs, or Song of Solomon, has been traditionally understood as a metaphor or allegory describing the marriage relationship between Israel and the Lord or the church and Christ, by both Jews and Christians.
Isaiah expressly names the Lord as husband to God’s people, writing, “For your maker is your husband; the Lord of hosts is his name, and the Holy One of Israel is your Redeemer; the God of the whole earth he is called.”
“The Lord has called you like a wife deserted and grieved in spirit, like a wife of youth when she is cast off,” says your God.
The prophet Hosea was commanded to engage in several prophetic sign acts, with the foundational one being God’s command to go take yourself a wife of whoredom and have children of whoredom, for the land commits great whoredom, forsaking the Lord. This led Hosea to publicly play the role of God and his wife, Gomer— the role of adulterous Israel.
Ultimately, we have the marriage supper of the Lamb image in Revelation 19, symbolizing the union between the church and Christ, of God the Father giving us to his Son as his beloved bride.
So by understanding and accepting that he is not the bridegroom but is both the friend and part of the Bride, the Baptist was able to rejoice knowing that the Lord’s purposes of redemption were being brought to fruition and that the Jubilee of God was now beginning.
The Baptist understood that he had more to celebrate and be glad for because he was number two to Christ, than if he was number one over the whole world.
Because the good King has come, his joy was complete, because he knew the source of joy and because he believed in God’s covenant promises made for his people. He knew it was neither his job nor place to achieve it.
“He must increase, but I must decrease.”
Fourth and finally, the Baptist understood that glory and honor are finite things; they are limited. He understood that if God’s purposes are being achieved, then the focus must naturally be turned away from him; he must turn towards Christ.
Instead, in humility and self-awareness, the Baptist was glad to bow out and remain satisfied with his ordained part in God’s plan. This final lesson, this final part, is a lesson which most Christians—and all human persons—have difficulty learning, accepting, and abiding by.
“He must increase, but I must decrease.”
We all— all of us— want to be number one; and that is a good desire for us. It is a drive which God gave us by making us in His image. We were given the command to be fruitful and multiply and fill the Earth and subdue it and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over every living thing that moves on the Earth.
But sin twists our correct desire for dominion, turning it into domination. Then we forget that, as we subdue the Earth, we are ourselves intended to be subdued and subordinate to the Lord God who made and commands us.
It is through the increase of our glory that we increase His glory. We do all things for the glory of God, and the glory we acquire, we redirect to Him, because truly it belongs to Him. Therefore, we all must decrease for His increase.
We shall all cast our crowns at His feet, surrendering our glory to Him. Christians do it in love and devotion, but all others with hatred, fear, and trembling—wailing and gnashing of teeth.
When we remember that the glory is not ours, when we remember that it’s not about us, when we remember that we are not the most important person in the world, then it becomes easier to rejoice and be satisfied and to better appreciate everything we possess as the gift from God that it is.
Yet, I cannot imagine that either this disciple of the Baptist or the Jew who were discussing purification were very pleased, happy, or satisfied with his response, because it didn’t really answer his question, did it?
He affirmed that Jesus is the Christ—well, he was not. He affirmed Jesus as God’s groom for his chosen bride, and he affirmed that Jesus must increase while he must decrease.
And this was actually the answer they needed to hear. Those who came to John for baptism were looking for a form or a degree of purification. They were concerned with improving their personal holiness and their standing or status before the Lord.
They wanted to be clean. But John never actually offered that to them. He offered them a baptism of repentance; an opportunity to make a public profession and a shown sign that they were sorry for the wrongs that they had done and that they were intentional about not repeating or continuing in. John did not do anything to purify the people; he merely offered them the opportunity to humble themselves and offer the Lord their contrite spirit and broken heart as a sacrifice of thanksgiving for his mercy and grace.
John could not purify the people—only God could; only Jesus Christ could and would. If they wanted to become pure, then they had to repent. John’s baptism didn’t purify them but instead pointed them to the one who would—Jesus Christ.
If they wanted to be purified, if they wanted to be made holy, if they wanted to be justified before God, then they needed to go to Jesus. They needed to follow the message and leave the messenger. The message of salvation in Christ Jesus was what mattered, not the man who proclaimed it.
Jesus was the object of their faith; Jesus was the master whom they needed to obey in fidelity and love. Therefore, Jesus would increase at the expense of John and at our expense as we humble ourselves before him.
Yet although we are decreased in some sense, we do not become less; we actually become more instead. By submitting to him, by humbling ourselves before him, by trusting him in faith, we are united to him and so share in all of his good benefits.
Through our union in Christ, our glory that we gave to him is shared back with us as even greater glory as His blood brothers and sisters, as His bride. His Spirit sanctifies us and cleanses us of our sin by removing all the impurity and stains of sin, restoring us to wholeness and truth—by making us who and what we were created to be.
Because we are all each like a rusted, broken-down, decrepit car that’s been exposed to the elements for years, and the Holy Spirit is like a mechanic and a body man. He grinds off the rust, patches and fills our holes, removing them, cleans and repairs our filthy and clogged motor, replaces the broken glass and the torn upholstery, then gives us a fresh coat of paint, new tires, and a full tank of gas. That’s restoration and sanctification.
Through the process of sanctification, we lose so much, but we gain far more, and it begins with our humility. When we humble ourselves and gladly accept that we are not number one, He must increase, but I must decrease.
So really, it was a question about purity and purification. We must gladly acknowledge Jesus Christ as both our Savior and Lord. We must decrease in our sinfulness, growing in holiness and so increase His glory.
Then we may joyfully submit ourselves to His rule over our lives. We must subdue our hearts to His sovereign reign for our good benefit and His glory. We must accept His protection and His restraint of our own worst inclinations as given through His word and by His Spirit.
We must live for His glory rather than our own, because it is only by His increase and through our decrease that we shall receive all that our Father in Heaven has promised and desires to give us.
This is what both John’s and Jesus’s disciples’ baptism means for us: a baptism of repentance. We both confess our sin and express our desire to stop. We turn to the Lord in faith and hope in His forgiveness.
Then we must begin to live more pure and holy lives for His glory in response to His mercy. Therefore, as Christians, we are called to live lives of holiness in our whole lives by fleeing from all of our past sinful practices in earnest repentance, by mortifying all of our sinful desires and inclinations, by submitting to Jesus Christ in all aspects of our lives, especially as moral law—as the rule by which we live.
By becoming better disciples of Christ by living chaste and pure lives in word, deed, thought, and desire; by doing good works of charity on account of our faith; by loving others sacrificially, especially those who seem unlovable, like our enemies; by serving others and humbling ourselves before men; by seeking the benefit and good of others before our own; by sharing the good news of Christ that we have received and believe with others; by teaching others to follow Christ and making them disciples through the increase of prayer, praise, confession, and thanksgiving; through the study of scripture, because the better you know it, the better you may follow and apply it in your own life.
And the better you know it, the better you will come to recognize your own sin and your need for Jesus. We Christians do all of this, not as a means of earning God’s love and favor, but because we know what He has already done for us in giving us His only begotten Son, Jesus Christ, to believe upon, so that all who believe in Him will not perish but will enjoy eternal life with Him in Heaven.
Because God so loved the world and so loves His adopted children.