John 5:32,33

There is another that beareth witness, &c.— This proof, taken from the testimony of John the Baptist, though our Lord seems to speak slightingly of it, when he compares it with the proof drawn from his own miracles, yet was an argument of particular force to the Jews, and could not fail to convince and confound them; for, as we read in another place, they durst not openly speak against John, because the people generally had him in esteem, and thought him a prophet. A proof, therefore, from his testimony would either remove their doubts, or reduce them to silence. The following observations will prove that the testimony of John ought to be received. He affirms that he knew Jesus to be the Messiah; and this knowledge he acquires, not by any observations which he made upon the life and behaviour of Christ, nor from comparing his actions with the prophesies relating to the Messiah; for it appears that at the time he gave his testimony, Christ had not discovered his divine mission, and was but just entering into his office; nor does it appear that Christ had declared any thing of it to him. He is not guided by conjectures, but by immediate revelation, and by a voice from heaven, declaring Christ to be the Son of God. He assures us, that God discovered to him that Christ was the Messiah. From the testimonywhich John gave, and from the manner in which he gave it, we may discover the character of a great and a good man. We see in him great austerity of life, self-denial, contempt of the pleasures and vanities of the world, an active yet discreet zeal, a courage and constancy arising from true piety; and a sincere modesty and humility. He flattered not the Pharisees and Sadducees; he assumed no honours which belonged not to him; he said less of himself than he might have said with truth. When his disciples were afraid that Christ would draw all men after him, and lessen the reputation of their master, he was not to be moved by such improper motives; nor did he cease to bear testimony to Christ, and acknowledge his own inferiority. Appointed of God to exhort and approve, he reproved even Herod, though he could not be ignorant of the danger to which he exposed himself. By his blameless and upright behaviour he gained the esteem of the Jews; and, after his death, was spoken of with the greatest veneration. He was a man who practised the austerities that he preached, severely virtuous, exhorted all men to righteousness, and lived suitably to his own doctrine. He could not act this part with a view to any worldly profit, and to enrich himself; he sought no such advantages; and if he had sought them, he would never have attained them by pretending to slight them, by dwelling in a wilderness, and by exhorting men to virtues and graces of which he had not set them an example. Nothing therefore can be thought to have influenced him, unless religion, vanity, and the love of fame. If he was guided by ambition, he had reason to be satisfied with his success; all Jerusalem was moved at his preaching. They had so good an opinion of him, that they thought him certainly one sent from God, perhaps one of the old prophets returned into the world; perhaps the Messiah himself. What use did he make of this favourable disposition of the people? He spake of himself with much lowliness and modesty, and exhorted them to acknowledge Christ as the Messiah. If he had been a proud and ambitious man, he would not have set Jesus above himself; he would at least have been silent, and have left the Jews to judge for themselves. We may therefore affirm, that he was what he seemed to be, a gracious man and a sincere lover of truth; and that he would not have deceived the people in any case; above all, not in a case so important. He decided a question, not of small importance, but concerning the Messiah foretold by the prophets, expected at that time, to whom the nation was bound to pay obedience, who should be a ruler, a deliverer, and the founderofan everlasting kingdom. If we suppose him capable of deceiving the people in this point, we must suppose him to be wicked to the highest degree; one who feared not God, nor regarded man; who endeavoured to lead into a fatal error his own nation, by whom he was honoured and respected. But it is unreasonable to suppose him guilty of so foul a crime. We may also conclude, that he could not have borne testimony to one whom he did not well know to be the Messiah, because common prudence would have kept him from throwing away, so foolishly, his good name and reputation. The character of the Messiah could not be long personated by the most artful impostor. He was to be a teacher of truth; in him the prophesies were to be accomplished, and by him many miracles were to be performed. If therefore John had directed the Jews to a false Messiah, to one in whom none of these characters appeared, his fraud or his error would have been discovered; he would have exposed himself to the punishment of a false prophet; at least, he would have lost the esteem and favour of the Jews, and the fair and unblemished reputation which till then he had preserved, and would have been the object of Jewish contempt and hatred. Nothing can make us suspect that he would have acted a part so inconsistent and extravagant, or hinder us from believing that he spake as he was directed by the Spirit of God. Nor is it less evident, that he acted on this occasion from no motives of interest or partiality. It was of no advantage to him; on the contrary, he saw that if Christ were acknowledged to be the Messiah, he would be no longer followed and admired. Nor can we suppose him to have been partial out of friendship, for there appears not to have been any intimacy between him and Christ. We may observe, that John was a person of eminent grace and virtue; that he had borne witness to Christ; that he was related to him, and that, upon all these accounts, he seemed to deserve distinguished marks of favour. But Christ, as far as we can learn from the evangelists, seldom conversed with him; the reason for which probably was, that the testimony of John might appear of more weight, where none could suspect him prejudiced for his friendand relation. But still it may be alleged against his testimony, that he was an enthusiast. Some of the Jews in the days of our Saviour said, that John the Baptist had lost his senses, because they had nothing else to say against him. The accusation is groundless; his discourses and his reputation sufficiently confute it; his prophetic character proves it to be false. He foretold the appearance of the Messiah, the calamities which should befal the unconverted Jews, the death of Christ, and the descent of the Holy Ghost. Enthusiasm may make a man fancy extraordinary communications with God, and it may lead him to austerities and self-denial; but it will not enable him to declare future events. If we put all these things together, we may conclude as we set out, that the Baptist's veracity in the testimony that he gave of Christ is unquestionable.