Expositor's Bible Commentary Commentary Matthew 3

“John” had been a popular name among the Jews from the time of John Hyrcanus (died 106 B. C.). The John of this verse was soon designated “the Baptist,” because baptism was so prominent in his ministry. He began his preaching in the “Desert of Judea,” a vaguely defined area including the lower Jordan Valley north of the Dead Sea and the country immediately west of the Dead Sea. “Desert” had long had prophetic overtones (e.g., the Law had been given in the “desert”; cf. Acts 7:30, 36, 38). 2 John’s preaching had two elements. The first was a call to “repent” (GK 3566). What is meant by this word is a radical transformation of the entire person, a fundamental turnaround involving mind and action and including overtones of grief; it results in “fruit in keeping with repentance.” Of course, all this assumes that a person’s actions are fundamentally off course and need radical change.

John applies this repentance to the religious leaders of his day (3:7–8) with particular vehemence.

The second element in John’s preaching was the nearness of the “kingdom of heaven,” and this is given as the ground for repentance. Throughout the OT there was a rising expectation of a divine visitation that would establish justice, crush opposition, and renew the very universe.

The predominant meaning of “kingdom” (GK 993) in both the OT and NT is “reign”: the term has dynamic force. In the first century there was little agreement among Jews as to what the messianic kingdom would be like. One popular assumption was that the Roman yoke would be shattered and there would be political peace and mounting prosperity for the people of God.

Except at 12:28; 19:24; 21:31, 43, Matthew always uses “kingdom of heaven” instead of “kingdom of God.” His preferred expression certainly does not restrict God’s reign to the heavens. The biblical goal is the manifest exercise of God’s sovereignty, his “reign” on earth and among humans. There are enough parallels among the Synoptics to imply that “kingdom of God” and “kingdom of heaven” denote the same thing. The most common explanation why Matthew avoided “kingdom of God” was to remove unnecessary offense to Jews who often used circumlocutions like “heaven” to refer to God (e.g., Daniel 4:26). Matthew may also be subtly anticipating the extent of Christ’s postresurrection authority: God’s sovereignty in heaven and on earth is now mediated through him (28:18).

This kingdom, John preached, “is near” (GK 1581). The Messianic Age has now drawn near, the same message preached by Jesus (4:17) and his disciples (10:7). According to Matthew, the kingdom came with Jesus and his preaching and miracles, it came with his death and resurrection, and it will come at the end of the age. The Baptist’s terminology, though veiled, necessarily aroused enormous excitement (v.5). But assorted apocalyptic and political expectations would have produced a profound misunderstanding of the kingdom being preached (see comment on Mk 1:44). Therefore Jesus himself purposely used veiled terminology when treating themes like this. Moreover, just as the angel’s announcement to Joseph declared Jesus’ primary purpose to be to save his people from their sins (1:21), so the first announcement of the kingdom is associated with repentance and confession of sin (3:6)—these themes are constantly intertwined in Matthew.

Matthew goes on to identify John the Baptist in an eschatological, prophecyand-fulfillment framework with the one of whom Isaiah spoke. In Isa 40:3 (cf. John’s own application of this verse in Jn 1:23) the way of the Lord is being “made straight” (a metaphor using road building to refer to repentance); in Mt 3:3 it is the way of Jesus. This sort of identification of Jesus with the Lord is common in the NT (e.g., Exodus 13:21 and 1 Corinthians 10:4; Isaiah 6:1 and Jn 12:41) and confirms the kingdom as being equally the kingdom of God and the kingdom of Jesus. The deity of Christ is clearly implicit in such texts.

Clothes of camel’s hair and a leather belt were not only the clothes of poor people but established links with Elijah (2 Kings 1:8; cf. Malachi 4:5). “Locusts” are large grasshoppers, still eaten in the East. Both Elijah and John had stern ministries in which austere garb and diet confirmed their message and condemned the idolatry of physical and spiritual softness. John’s impact was enormous (v.5), and his crowds came from a wide area.

Clothes of camel’s hair and a leather belt were not only the clothes of poor people but established links with Elijah (2 Kings 1:8; cf. Malachi 4:5). “Locusts” are large grasshoppers, still eaten in the East. Both Elijah and John had stern ministries in which austere garb and diet confirmed their message and condemned the idolatry of physical and spiritual softness. John’s impact was enormous (v.5), and his crowds came from a wide area.

Confession of sin was commanded in the law, not only as part of a priest’s duties (Leviticus 16:21), but as an individual responsibility for wrongs done (Leviticus 5:5; Leviticus 26:40; Numbers 5:6–7). In Israel’s better days this was carried out (Nehemiah 9:2–3; Psalms 32:5). In the NT (cf. Acts 19:18) confession is scarcely less important. Since John was urging people to prepare for Messiah’s coming by repenting and being baptized, we may surmise that open renunciation of sin was a precondition of his baptism.

The Jordan River is fast flowing. No doubt John stationed himself at one of the fords as he prepared the way for the Lord.