Was John’s baptism of heavenly or of human origin? Answer me.
The chief priests, the scribes, and the elders asked what might have been a legitimate question when they asked, "By what authority are you doing these things?" It was an answer which Jesus was more than willing to provide at another time in another context.
For as the Father has life in himself, so he has granted the Son also to have life in himself. And he has given him authority to execute judgment, because he is the Son of Man (see John 5:26-27).
Why then did Jesus not simply provide an answer in the present case? Was he just interested in stirring up trouble? Although Jesus was definitely not trouble averse there was an additional reason in this case.
So they said to Jesus in reply, “We do not know.”
Those who questioned Jesus were being disingenuous. They weren't interested in the truth, and so giving them too much of it would not have been helpful for them. If they had been able to say one thing or the other about the baptism of John, that it was from heaven or from earth, that might be some basis from which a dialog could begin. Even if they had said they did not believe in John, if they were actually interested in the truth about such things, stating that belief directly could have been a beginning with which Jesus could work.
“Neither shall I tell you by what authority I do these things.”
Jesus was willing to discuss the truth with those who wanted to know it. But to those who had no interest. or who had only mere curiosity about what he might say, he would give no answer. Those who were asking questions only so that they could appear favorably in the eyes of others...
“If we say, ‘Of heavenly origin,’ he will say,
‘Then why did you not believe him?’
But shall we say, ‘Of human origin’?”–
they feared the crowd,
...he did not feel compelled to engage in argument. It wasn't that Jesus did anything overly clever and elaborate in his response, as he sometimes trapped his questioners in their own questions (as he did with those who caught the woman in adultery). Rather, he demonstrated a simple, practical principle that can be helpful for anyone. There is no point in arguing with the insincere, with those who have ulterior motives, who aren't willing to at least state the truth as they understand it directly but instead are crafting a message to please a certain demographic.
Jesus was willing to persuade those who would allow themselves to be swayed, to convince those with ears to hear. But to enter into an argument with ones such as we read about today would have only confused them and possibly caused them to further harden their hearts. The fact that they must have been frustrated with the answer Jesus gave was in fact a challenge to them to become more sincere themselves so that they might learn to say what they meant and to ask what they really didn't understand or desired to know.
The Spirit of Jesus intends for us to have the gift of the same wisdom which Jesus himself displayed. We are meant to know when to engage and when not to engage. We are enjoined to be ready to give an answer (see First Peter 3:15). But we aren't supposed to getting consistently caught up in debates that don't matter, debates about mere words (see Second Timothy 2:14). There is a time to speak and a time to be silent, and Jesus wants us to have the wisdom to know which is which.
When I was young and innocent,
I sought wisdom openly in my prayer
I prayed for her before the temple,
and I will seek her until the end,
and she flourished as a grape soon ripe.
No comments:
Post a Comment