John is ministering in the desert, and people are coming to hear him from near and far. Along with the crowds came the spiritual leaders of the people – the Pharisees and Sadducees. But who were these people?
They weren’t the same group. Though both were influential among the people, they held differing viewpoints on Jewish spiritual thought and practice. The Baker encyclopedia of the Bible says of the Pharisee, “Josephus, who tells us that he belonged to this sect, wrote toward the end of the 1st century that the Pharisees were “extremely influential among the townsfolk; and all prayers and sacred rites of divine worship are performed according to their exposition. This is the great tribute that the inhabitants of the cities, by practising the highest ideal both in their way of living and in their discourse, have paid to the excellence of the Pharisees” (Antiq 18.15).” By comparison, the Sadducees “opposed the legal regulations introduced by the Pharisees and were saying that only the OT Law should be considered mandatory. In this, as in their stand against belief in angels and in life after death, they appear to have regarded the Pharisees as innovators and themselves as conservatives.”
Of course, which was more ‘conservative’ and which was more ‘liberal’ is all rather irrelevant. The point is that these two groups represent the spectrum of Jewish leadership. In fact, every time we see these two together in Scripture, it is indicative of ‘people from all over the religious spectrum.’
Verses 7-8 of chapter 3 record John’s reaction, “But when he saw many of the Pharisees and Sadducees coming to where he was baptizing, he said to them: “You brood of vipers! Who warned you to flee from the coming wrath? Produce fruit in keeping with repentance.” John calls the lot of them a ‘brood of vipers’. To say such a thing is no small insult. He is calling them out as the devil’s children, even as they present themselves as God’s children coming to be baptized! That is harsh. Moreover, his warning is that they must not simply go through the outward motions of repentance (as one would believe they were aiming to do). John tells them they must actually repent!
RC Sproul once wrote, “Generally speaking, [Biblical repentance] has to do with the changing of one’s mind with respect to one’s behavior. It contains the idea of ruing. To rue something means to regret a particular action. It carries with it not only an intellectual assessment but also an emotional or visceral response. The feeling most often associated with repentance in Scripture is that of remorse, regret, and a sense of sorrow for having acted in a particular way. Thus, repentance involves sorrow for a previous form of behavior.”
Our actions always have consequences. True repentance not only has the very real benefit of avoiding the wrath of God, but produces spiritual fruit. Of course, only you and God above know whether or not your repentance is heartfelt and real, or if you are merely sorry for being caught out. But if it is heartfelt and real, repentance will do more than change your mind. It will change who you are, and that will result in changed behaviour that all around you can see.
Repentance is mainly remorse for the share we had in the revolt that wounded Jesus Christ, our Lord. Further, I have discovered that truly repentant men never quite get over it, for repentance is not a state of mind and spirit that takes its leave as soon as God has given forgiveness and as soon as cleansing is realized. That painful and acute conviction that accompanies repentance may well subside and a sense of peace and cleansing come, but even the holiest of justified men will think back over his part in the wounding and the chastisement of the Lamb of God. A sense of shock will still come over him. A sense of wonder will remain—wonder that the Lamb that was wounded should turn His wounds into the cleansing and forgiveness of one who wounded Him.
AW Tozer
APPLICATION: Repentance
What are you merely sorry for, and what are you repentant of?