There is a growing agreement among scholars that there is some confusion in our data as to John the Baptist.  There are gaps in the record—­for instance, how and why did the school of John survive as it did (Acts 18:25, 19:1-7)?  And again there are, in the judgement of some, developments of the story.  The Gospel, with varying degrees of explicitness, and St. Paul by inference (Acts 19:4) tell us that John pointed to “him which should come after him.”  Christians, at any rate, after the Resurrection, had no doubt that this was Jesus.  Whether John was as definite as the narratives now represent him to have been, has been doubted in view of his message to Jesus.  But that is not our present subject.  We are concerned less with John as precursor than as teacher and thinker.

Even if our data are defective, still enough is given us to let us see a very striking and commanding figure.  We have a picture of him, his dress, his diet, his style of speech, his method of action—­in every way he is a signal and arresting man.  The son of a priest, he is an ascetic, who lives in the wilderness, dresses like a peasant, and eats the meanest and most meagre of food—­a man of the desert and of solitude.  And the whole life reacts on him and we can see him, lean and worn, though still a young man, a keen, rather excitable spirit—­in every feature the marks of revolt against a civilization which he views as an apostasy.  Luke, using a phrase from the Old Testament, says, “The word of God came upon John in the wilderness” (Luke 3:2).  Luke leans to Old Testament phrase, and here is one that hits off the man to the very life.  Jesus himself confirms Luke’s judgement (Mark 11:29-33).  The Word of the Lord has come on this ascetic figure, and he goes to the people with the message; he draws their attention and they crowd out to see him.  He makes a great sensation.  He is not like other men—­for Jesus quotes their remark that “he had a devil” (Luke 7:33)—­a rough and ready way of explaining unlikeness to the average man.  When he sees his congregation his words are not conciliatory; he addresses them as a “generation of vipers” (Luke 3:7); and his text is the “wrath to come.”

Jesus asks whether they went out to see a reed shaken by the wind, or someone dressed like a courtier—­the last things to which anyone would compare John.  There was nothing supple about him, as Herod found, and Herodias (Mark 6:17-20); he was not shaken by the wind; there was no trimming of his sails.  The austerity of his life and the austerity of his spirit go together, and he preached in a tone and a language that scorched.  He preached righteousness, social righteousness, and he did it in a great way.  He brought back the minds of his people, like Amos and others, to God’s conceptions and away from their own.  Crowds of people went out to hear him (Mark 1:5).  And he made a deep impression on many whose lives needed amendment (Matt. 21:26, 32; Luke 20:6).[27] We have the substance of what he said in the third