The pitiable fact stands out that the only result with them is a wordy strife about the relative success of these two, Jesus and John.  The most that their minds, steeped in jealousies and rivalries, ever watching with badger eyes to undercut some one else, could see, was a rivalry between these two men.  John’s instant open-hearted disclaimer made no impression upon them.  They seemed not impressionable to such disinterested loyalty.

A little later, probably not much, John’s ruggedly honest preaching against sin came too close home to suit Herod.  He promptly shuts up the preacher in prison, with no protest from the nation’s leaders.  These leaders had developed peculiar power in influencing their civil rulers by the strenuousness of their protests.  That they permitted the imprisonment of John with no word of protest, was a tacit throwing overboard of John’s own claims, of John’s claims for Jesus, and of Jesus’ own claim.

Here is the first sharp crisis.  From the first, the circle of national leaders characterized by John, the writer of the Gospel, as “the Jews,” including the inner clique of chief priests and the Pharisees, ignored Jesus; with silent contempt, coldly, severely ignored.  This was before the temple-cleansing affair.  That intensified their attitude toward the next stage.  They had to proceed cautiously, because the crowd was with Jesus.  And full well these keen leaders knew the ticklishness of handling a fanatical Oriental mob, as subsequent events showed.  Now John is imprisoned, with the consent of these leaders, possibly through their connivance.

Jesus keenly and quickly grasps the situation.  First ignored, then made the subject of evil gossip, the temple clash, and now His closest friend subjected to violence, His own rejection is painfully evident.  He makes a number of radical changes.  His place of activity is changed to a neighboring province under different civil rule; His method, to preaching from place to place; His purpose, to working with individuals.  There’s a peculiar word used here by Matthew to tell of Jesus’ departure from Judea to a province under a different civil ruler; “He withdrew.”  The word used implies going away because of danger threatening.  We will run across it again and each time at a crisis point.

The leaders refused Jesus because He was not duly labelled.  It seems to be a prevailing characteristic to want men labelled, especially a characteristic of those who make the labels.  There is always an eager desire regarding a stranger to learn whom he represents, who have put their stamp upon him and accepted him.  And if the label is satisfactory, he is acccepted in the degree in which the label is accepted.  Others are marked with a large interrogation point.  Inherent worth has a slow time.  But sure?  Yes, but slow.  Jesus bore no label whose words they could spell out or wanted to.  They were a bit rusty in the language of worth.