But when Herod heard, he said, “This is John, whom I beheaded.” (Mark 6:16)
There are occasions in Scripture that make us stop and think to ourselves, “What a waste.” Recently, we were reminded of John’s beheading at the hand of Herod (Mark 6:14–29). The king had stolen his brother’s wife and was confronted by John. While that did not sit well with Herodias, Herod had a high regard the prophet and refused to do more than imprison him—perhaps hoping to keep him quiet for awhile until his new wife’s temper could be assuaged. It was all for naught as the “Queen of Hearts” triumphantly eliminated what had stuck in her craw.
We see this as wasteful, not just because John died in his thirties, but because this prophet was instrumental in pointing people to Christ. He knew his place and duty:
Behold! The Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world! This is He of whom I said, “After me comes a Man who is preferred before me, for He was before me.” (John 1:29–30)and seemed perfectly content to give Jesus full honor: He must increase, but I must decrease (John 3:30).
Here, a powerful witness for the Lamb of God is cut down in early adulthood, and we are left wondering why God did not ensure that John was released from prison to assist as one of Jesus’ disciples. This is not the first time that the Lord has removed the forerunner that His anointed one may prosper.
In the days of a united Israel, King Saul had a son named Jonathan who was best friends with the future king, David. Because of a deep love for the Lord and David, Jonathan did everything in his power to impede Saul’s plots and to keep David safe. His singular desire was for David to take his rightful place and to be a faithful subject.
Then Jonathan, Saul’s son, arose and went to David in the woods and strengthened his hand in God. And he said to him, “Do not fear, for the hand of Saul my father shall not find you. You shall be king over Israel, and I shall be next to you. Even my father Saul knows that.” (1 Sam 23:16–17)Sadly, Jonathan was killed in battle with the Philistines (1 Sam 31:1–2; 1 Chr 10:1–2). We can only imagine how well this union would have worked out, although, we can be assured that Jonathan would have been a more trustworthy general than Joab. Again we question why the Lord removed such a promising individual.
Out with the old
John the baptizer and Jonathan, son of Saul, shared a common problem: they were sinners, though righteous through a life of faith, leading those who were called to be the same. Whether or not the followers acted righteously, what we know is that had the forerunner lived, a division in God’s work was certain.
After Saul and Jonathan died, others in the royal family attempted to wrest the throne from David. Initially, Abner, commander of Saul’s army, made Ishbosheth the son of Saul king in Mahanaim (2 Sam 2:8–10) for a two-year reign. Later, when David is fleeing Jerusalem from Absalom, Ziba the servant of Mephibosheth, Jonathan’s son, attempts to ingratiate himself to the king by reporting of his master: Indeed he is staying in Jerusalem, for he said, “Today the house of Israel will restore the kingdom of my father to me” (2 Sam 16:3)—a falsehood made evident upon David’s return to Jerusalem (2 Sam 19:24–30). Finally, Bichri the Benjamite, Saul’s tribe, declared himself leader over Israel save for Judah (2 Sam 20:1–2). What we discover is a lingering loyalty to the house of Saul that was ultimately eradicated when the remaining sons of Saul were executed by the Gibeonites (2 Sam 21:5–9). Had Saul’s house (save for Mephibosheth) been allowed to continue, a long-term division, if not civil war, would have ensued as occurred after Solomon’s death.
We look at the situation in Israel and think to ourselves, “Well, that might have happened back then, but if John had been able to work with Jesus, this type of thing would have been avoided.” Not so fast. During Jesus’ ministry, John’s disciples asked Him why His disciples did not fast as they and disciples of the Pharisees do (Mt 9:14; Mk 2:18; Lk 5:33), so we see a difference in thought between the two groups that the Lord needed to address. Later, Jesus’ disciples asked Him to teach them to pray as John taught his disciples (Lk 11:1). While the two groups would have a common basis for prayer, the emphases would be different since John was pointing to the Messiah, and Jesus was that One. Later, we are introduced to the teaching ministry of Apollos. We first meet this Alexandrian Jew after he begins teaching boldly in Ephesus (Acts 18:24), but as of yet, having only known the baptism of John (Acts 18:25). Because Apollos still lacked key information concerning Jesus, Aquila and Priscilla took him aside for additional teaching, after which he left for Achaia. This departure left a hole in that Apollos had made converts in Ephesus but unto the baptism of John. The apostle Paul finished the work of baptizing them into Christ (Acts 19:5–6). Though this seems fairly innocuous, the underlying issues came to a head in Corinth where believers were now defining themselves by whom they were baptized (1 Cor 1:11–13). Instead of recognizing the Lord Jesus as their head, the believers in Corinth had taken the cultural route of aligning with a particular teacher.
In with the new
We see the humility of both Jonathan and John. They knew their respective places, but their followers and families did not. Each was appointed to a particular service—loyalty to the coming anointed one—but because of the sinfulness of even righteous men, the former had to be removed so that the one to whom proper fealty was due might take his place unencumbered. The son of Jesse was to reign; the Root and Branch of Jesse is to reign forever.
These examples cause us to face the harsh truth that what man sees as a “dream team” or a “match made in heaven” can actually be a recipe for disaster. God had ordained individuals for specific purposes in His divine plan. In order to fulfill those purposes, the prior dispensation had to be removed. Returning to the scene in which the disciples of John asked about fasting, Jesus pointed forward to the inauguration of new things when He said:
No one sews a piece of unshrunk cloth on an old garment; or else the new piece pulls away from the old, and the tear is made worse. And no one puts new wine into old wineskins; or else the new wine bursts the wineskins, the wine is spilled, and the wineskins are ruined. But new wine must be put into new wineskins. (Mk 2:21–22)While we mourn the loss of the old, we recognize the wisdom of the new as our Lord works His eternal plan to our benefit, and we rejoice in it.
