Tell me more ×
Biblical Hermeneutics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for professors, theologians, and those interested in exegetical analysis of biblical texts. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Matthew 11:11 (KJV):

Verily I say unto you, Among them that are born of women there hath not risen a greater than John the Baptist: notwithstanding he that is least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he.

Since the least person in the kingdom of heaven is greater than John the Baptist, logically he is not part of the kingdom. From other passages, it seems that Jesus thought highly of John, so it seems strange that He would say that John isn't found in the kingdom. How can we resolve this apparent contradiction?

share|improve this question

migrated from christianity.stackexchange.com Sep 15 '12 at 20:05

8 Answers

I don't think Reformed theology or any other tradition really bears on this issue so much as simple hermeneutics. Jesus spoke using many traits of ordinary language , and forcing an interpretation on the passage that does not take into account the ordinary ways that language is used and people communicate ideas only leaves people with twisted conclusions.

Here Jesus is not making a point about John so much as he is making a point about the significance of being included in the Kingdom of heaven. There is a comparison being made about relative significance, but this has nothing to do with passing judgement on John as being in or out of the kingdom. In fact we have every reason to believe that he was himself included in it.

Basically, your asking the wrong question. It's not a matter of what John the Baptist lacked or that made the other disciples great. In fact the point of the passage is exactly the opposite of that: the success or failure, greatness or smallness of our lives from an earthly view has exactly no bearing on our status in the Kingdom.

The point about John the Baptist was simply that although he played a very special role history -- a role itself foretold as one who would prepare the way at the coming of the Messiah -- this did not make him special in the Kingdom because that placement is dependent on the work of the Son of Man, not that of John. What greater honor could a man have than to be the immediate herald of the greatest event in all of history? And yet that honor and distinction is shown as insignificant compared to the honor that we are all given as believers grafted into God's family being made co-inheritors with Christ in His kingdom.

All this verse shows us is that any earthly rankings in honor are utterly irrelevant when it comes to our membership in the Kingdom.

share|improve this answer

I've always interpreted this as that Jesus was referring to the Baptism of the Spirit. John never received the Baptism that Jesus was offering (John even asked Jesus at the time of Christ Baptism that he would baptize him). I think John didn't necessarily want 'water' baptism, but the 'spirit' baptism that Christ only could offer. I think that when Christ said "notwithstanding he that is least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he" he is referring to those that receive the baptism of the spirit.

share|improve this answer
Welcome to Hermeneutics.SE. Could you expand this to show on what basis you have interpreted this verse this way? – Caleb Sep 22 '12 at 5:50
@Caleb sure. This obviously would take a lot of space so I'll try to write something on it and post it on my site. I'll comment the link to the article. – ironman99 Sep 22 '12 at 23:11

Do you realise that in Physics, the smaller the particle or phenomenon, the more power we ascribe to them? And we spend trillions combined to look for as small and fundamental a particle as possible?

In Democracy, the principle is that the most powerful is the lowest denominator - the voter. Even though, whether this principal principle is observed is questionable.

In engineering, we frequently look for the lowest common denominator because action at the lowest common denominator is almost always the most effective.

The elementary and fundamental members are the tiny little bits that compose the macro-structure. They are the most significant members of a macro-structure.

The smallest are often the greatest in the physical world (and frequently in medicine and biology). The lowest common denominator directly correlates to the highest common factor - how can we resolve this contradiction?

share|improve this answer
I would like to add that Jethro(father-in-law of Moses) and Jesus advocated that representative Democracy in its purest form is the kingdom of heaven. – Blessed Geek Oct 7 '12 at 20:54

I think the answer lies in what Jesus told his disciples about who was greatest in the kingdom. There are children born of the law (flesh) and those born of the Spirit (Grace). In God's kingdom, children born of Grace are of higher rank. Those born of the flesh still see wealth and fame and power as being associated with greatness. Those born of the Spirit, however, are servants. John represented the LAW and the prophets while Jesus represented unmerited Grace. Note that at Jesus baptism, John said 'it is I who needs to be baptized by you'.

share|improve this answer
Hi Alex and welcome to Biblical Hermeneutics. Is there something in the text that makes you say that John represents the law and the prophets? (Or is that a reasonable, logical conclusion?) Could you say a little more about that? Thanks. – Monica Cellio May 10 at 0:09
@Alex, when you say John represents the law, are you referring to e.g., Acts 19:4, where Paul says that John's baptism was one of repentance? Perhaps you could strengthen your answer by bringing in that text and interacting with it. – Ray May 10 at 11:21

In this case of the speech Christ gave about the Baptizer the translation suffers (and not only the English but the Greek from Hebrew/Aramaic already). What Jesus here was contrasting was the greatness of John as shown in his time and life compared to the coming greatness of the Sons of the Kingdom.

It is not at all excluding this man whom Christ held in highest regard (as the context unsurpassably shows) but indicating and thus announcing the transcending nobility of what is to come. (In his letter to brothers and sisters in Rome Paul wrote that even all human creation is awaiting the coming of the sons of God. (Romans 8).

This misunderstanding has some share in contributing to the widespead disregard of Law and Prophets that has been seen in the church from the 2nd century on. (Papias of Hierapolis wrote that Matthew's account had been translated to Greek by some as good as they could. (The account of events after the death of Christ, chapter 27, appear quite distorted as well. There was with certainty no resurrection of holy ones. Corpses had become exposed after the earthquake. Otherwise it would again have been a contradiction: The dead of Israel regarded holy, but John, great among the prophets, not even considered least of the Kingdom)). Even in translation camels seem to be swallowed easier than mosquitos.

share|improve this answer

Although John the Baptist was the greatest prophet among all prophets (Mt 11:11), he was spiritually dead. Up until the time of the giving of the Spirit on Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), all peoples of all times in the Old Covenant (Old Testament) were spiritually dead notwithstanding that only some were righteous-by-faith. Not until the inauguration of the New Covenant in the Christian New Testament are the righteous-by-faith now "born again" -- that is, they are spiritually born anew (and no longer spiritually dead). Thus the least of people (who is spiritually alive) in the New Covenant is greater than the greatest prophet (who was spiritually dead) in the Old Covenant, who in this case happens to be John the Baptist. Since he was beheaded before Pentecost, John the Baptist did not participate in the heavenly kingdom, or Kingdom of Heaven, which is the New Covenant (Acts 26:17-18 and Colossians 1:13). The exception of course were those from the Old Covenant who were resuscitated from the dead so that they would participate in New Covenant in Matthew 27:52, which correlated in partial fulfillment of Ezekiel 37:13-14, which spoke of the New Covenant.

share|improve this answer
How should a man like Daniel legitimately be viewed as "spiritually dead"? Or (those few) others like him? Don't you see how unwarranted this church-approach is? – hannes May 10 at 22:03
@hannes - Did anyone who died in the Old Testament ever anticipate going "up" to heaven, or "down" to Sheol? – Joseph May 10 at 22:22
@ Joseph. The resting in sleep of a disciple after Paul does not differ from that of Abraham or Job or Daniel. (1 Thess 4:13 Now we do not want you to be uninformed, brothers and sisters, about those who are asleep, so that you will not grieve like the rest who have no hope. 4:14 For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, so also we believe that God will bring with him those who have fallen asleep as Christians.) – hannes May 11 at 7:02
@hannes - When Lazarus died and went to be with Abraham according to Luke 16:19-31, the location was not heaven up yonder, but Sheol down under. That is, Jesus indicated that this location was both a place of rest (for righteous Lazarus and Abraham) and a place of torment (for the unrighteous rich man). – Joseph May 11 at 17:55
@ Joseph - This parable is more likely a parodism against his opponents (who believed in these things) than a doctrine to turn upside down everything Law and Prophets had been teaching thus far. – hannes May 11 at 18:13
show 2 more comments

The end of the Old Testament and the beginning of the new. John the Baptist was the last of the Old Testament prophets. Hence Jesus Christ was mentioning him as being the least in the kingdom as in a timeline of prophets.

share|improve this answer
1  
Are you saying that "least" means "last"? – Monica Cellio May 12 at 18:52

i think probably john when imprisoned doubted jesus is the messiah that he sent his disciples to find out if jesus is the one or to expect someone else. Though he is the only prophet who had the first hand chance of seeing the messiah, yet he doubted later. could this bear a consequence of jesus referring him that the least in the kingdom will be greater than him.

share|improve this answer

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.