John and Jesus – Defining the Social Context of the Gospel Message through Differences

There may be no more unusual relationship in the scriptures than that of John the Baptist and Jesus of Nazareth.  Cousins related by blood, both with unique conception stories and childhood upbringing.  Both sharing the message of the universal Gospel, and the elder humbly submitting to the authority of the younger – allowing one to diminish as the other increases in power, authority, and social popularity.

Yet, within this relationship a powerful message comes, not from what they have in common – but what they don’t have in common.

Here we have for all intents and purposes a hermit, living in the wilderness, who lives on eating locusts.  For some reason he is regularly depicted as someone wearing fur, unshaven, and unkempt hair – somewhat of a social bum.

Then we have someone who is schooled and educated (to what extent secularly is unknown), he knows how to speak and talk eloquently, he reasons and can converse with any social class.  He is popular among his colleagues, and challenging to his enemies.  He carries with him a social status, and a social claim – King of the Jews – and he commands attention.  He is a socialite in many respects.

These differences were emphasized by Christ, when he was challenged for drinking and dinning with the masses.  His response to the challenge was to highlight the hypocrisy within their criticisms: a reference that John had been sent who didn’t sup and didn’t drink (and was a hermit) and was criticized for not doing so, and then Christ was sent who did sup and did drink (somewhat of a socialite) and in turn was still criticized. 

To some degree, if images of these two characters were placed side by side, it would appear somewhat awkward; the hermit and the socialite.  No doubt this discrepancy between the two social statuses increases the awe at took place at the baptism of Christ – the city boy submitting himself to the hermit in the woods, while at the same time the hermit acknowledging the power within the city boy’s authority.

But regardless of how awkward that is in a social context (standing side by side); we have to remember that they stood side by side.  They shared the same message.  They were on the same team.  And regardless of how they looked, appeared, or acted – they were carrying the same message.

There is a powerful message here of differences in administration and lifestyle.  This was the lifestyle (environment) that John chose; it can be assumed that there was something about the wilderness that he enjoyed – yet, he carried the same message.

Is this not relevant today?  We see people placed in positions within the church who may appear of a different class, missionaries with thick accents, and life acquaintances who seem to have picked a different path.  But can they all not carry the same message?  Can’t they all have the opportunity to succeed in their endeavors?

The Gospel is true – but truth doesn’t come with an image or a status, but with a spirit.  Truth can be independent of style, technique, or personality.  God requires all types to do all types of thing – for he looks upon the heart, and not on the outward appearance. Should not we do likewise?