Grace in the Dungeon: Why John the Baptist's Momentary Doubt Does Not Mean Failure

A Review of John Niemelä's Article, "Did John the Baptist Lose His Faith While in Prison? Matthew 11:2-3" (Grace In Focus, January/February 2025), pp. 17-19.

by Jonathan Perreault

In the article '"Did John the Baptist Lose His Faith While in Prison?", John Niemelä offers a revisionist view of John's experience. While Niemelä raises an interesting question, I find his analysis to be significantly lacking in substance, as it rests primarily on a series of unsupported assumptions. Following is my full review, in which I detail my reasons for saying this.

Niemelä begins the article by asking two questions: "Did imprisonment cause John the Baptist to doubt? Did this courageous herald of the Messiah fail to finish strong?" It is important to realize that these are two different questions, but Niemelä writes as if the latter question must follow from the former. In other words, Niemelä seems to assume that if John the Baptist doubted, then he failed to finish strong. Thus, at the end of the article Niemelä has an entire section titled "PROOF THAT JOHN FINISHED STRONG," as if that was in question. But even if John doubted, it doesn't mean that he didn't finish strong. John the Baptist could have lapsed into momentary or temporary doubt, but Jesus' reply to his question could have calmed his fears and reassured him.[1] Thus, it is entirely possible that John the Baptist "finished strong," even if he doubted. This also answers Niemelä's point about how Jesus praised John the Baptist by saying, "Among those born of women there is not a greater prophet than John the Baptist" (Luke 7:28). In light of this statement by Jesus, Niemelä asks: "Would one expect such a commendation if the Baptist's faith had just crashed? Would Jesus praise him publicly at this very moment? I think not." But is this not grace?! If John's faith had momentarily failed and Jesus still praised him in spite of the momentary lapse, it simply proves that Jesus is gracious! This restorative grace is beautifully illustrated by the specific vocabulary Jesus uses elsewhere to describe how He handles those who are struggling to remain productive. For instance, He who is "full of grace and truth" (Jn. 1:17) lifts up his servant (cf. Jn. 15:2, where the Greek word αἴρω means "to raise" or "lift up") so that his faith will be strengthened![2] Just as a vinedresser lifts a branch out of the mud to give it strength and help it become more fruitful, Jesus used His public commendation to lift John out of the "mud" of his prison-induced doubt. Such a commendation is perfectly consistent with the gracious character of our Lord, who "will bring to light the things hidden in darkness" (1 Cor. 4:5), revealing the true heart of a servant even when it is obscured by a temporary trial.

Niemelä goes on to say, "Over 99 percent of Christians would assert something like ['John the Baptist developed an Elijah complex and didn't finish strong.']" But where did Niemelä come up with that statistic? Maybe he's simply using hyperbole, or exaggeration to make a point. Because even from my brief study on the topic of whether or not John the Baptist doubted while in prison (and I myself being someone who believes that John did, in fact, doubt), I wouldn't even put the number of Christians who believe that at 99 percent! It is likely much less. From my research I have found that there is actually considerable debate on the issue. If "Over 99 percent of Christians" would assert what Niemelä has assumed, there would hardly be so much debate on the question. As Niemelä even indicated in his article (citing G. H. Trench as an example), there are quite a few Bible commentators who take the view that John the Baptist didn't doubt or lose his faith while in prison.[3]

Drawing from Matthew 11:2-3 and Luke 7:19, Niemelä goes on to contend that "Contrary to overwhelming popular opinion, these verses do not say that the Baptist doubted." Agreed, but neither do those verses state that he DIDN'T doubt! Niemelä then asserts, "Interpreters have assumed that John was depressed." But ironically, his own view is also an assumption! This is evident in that he says, "the text points in a different direction." Since the text doesn't explicitly confirm what Niemelä is assuming, he simply concludes that "it points in [that] direction." So it's Niemelä's opinion, not what the text actually says.

Niemelä then abruptly transitions to discuss the phrase "come and see" in John's Gospel, but he (Niemelä) fails to explain how it connects with the main premise of his article (which has to do with John the Baptist's faith). Niemelä simply says, "After considering the passages in John, a careful examination of Matthew 11 and Luke 7 will be in order." The logic behind this shift is unclear. What's the connection? Apparently Niemelä is attempting to show that John the Baptist sent his disciples to question Jesus for their benefit rather than to allay or relieve any personal doubts of his own. But Niemelä really does not explain the connection very well at all, and thus the entire next section of the article (which Niemelä titles "SENDING SOMEONE TO ASK A QUESTION") feels, if not completely off topic, at least disjointed and out of place. It's as if Niemelä is taking the reader on an excursion, but never clearly telling us where he's going or why.

One thing I noticed about Niemelä's interpretation of these passages is that, despite his claim that "interpreters have assumed that John was depressed," he ironically builds his own case largely on conjecture! A case in point is this statement by Niemelä:

"Was there any reason for John to imagine that some of his disciples needed to be persuaded by Jesus? Yes, indeed. John 3:26 shows that some of them harbored jealousy and ill-will toward Jesus: 'Rabbi, He who was with you beyond the Jordan, to whom you have testified—behold, He is baptizing, and all are coming to Him!' (John 3:26). Their animosity toward Jesus is especially troubling because it was voiced shortly before John’s arrest. Soon, they would no longer have daily interaction with John. If they had a grudge against Jesus while John was a free man, their resentment likely grew during his imprisonment. John’s praises of Jesus in John 3:27-36 fell on deaf ears. What was John to do? How could he persuade those of his disciples who (in misguided loyalty to one who was only Jesus' herald) shunned the very One whom John exalted? John arranged for them to hear Jesus’ answer to the very question they had (essentially) asked him: 'Is Jesus truly the Coming One?' As much as they might wish to avoid Jesus, they would certainly carry out John’s command. It was not the Baptist who needed Jesus’ answer; his disciples were the beneficiaries. John provided them with a chance to hear the answer from Jesus’ own lips."

Notice the words that Niemelä uses to describe John's disciples. He claims: "some of them harbored jealousy and ill-will toward Jesus;" "Their animosity toward Jesus is especially troubling;" "If they had a grudge against Jesus;" "their resentment likely grew;" "his disciples...shunned the very One whom John exalted" -- but none of this is in the biblical text! Niemelä is building his case largely on conjecture. The concern voiced by John's disciples in John 3:26 could more naturally be attributed to misguided loyalty to their mentor, rather than the explicit "animosity" that Niemelä suggests. Even the quote cited from G. H. Trench doesn't go so far as to ascribe ill-will and wrong-doing to John's disciples. Thus it appears that Niemelä is guilty of the very thing he has condemned in others, namely, building his view largely on assumption.

Niemelä concludes his article by saying, "Christianity has misread Matt 11:2-3 and Luke 7:19. John 'outvited' [read: 'sent them out' or 'directed'] two of his disciples to query Jesus so His word would stabilize them. John's intentions were noble; his imprisonment did not give him an Elijah complex." Niemela goes on to say, "Matt 11:11a and Luke 7:28a suggest that John finished strong and will hear, 'Well done, good and faithful servant.'" I have no doubt that John the Baptist will hear "Well done, good and faithful servant" from the lips of Christ on Judgment Day. That is not the point of contention, at least with me. As I've said, John the Baptist could have lapsed into doubt yet still finished strong.[4] Thus both of those things could be true; they are not mutually exclusive.

Years ago Zane Hodges made a statement that perfectly captures the reality of John's struggle, and I agree with it one-hundred percent: "When John the Baptist asked, 'Are You the Coming One, or do we look for another?' (Matt 11:3), he was doubting his earlier conviction that Jesus was indeed the Christ."[5] Because of this statement by Zane Hodges, I almost titled this article, "John Niemelä vs. Zane Hodges on John the Baptist Doubting Jesus". I'm not saying that Niemelä is wrong simply because he disagrees with Zane Hodges, but it definitely leaves a person wondering how far out on a limb Niemelä has ventured?

In conclusion, the following statement by Thomas L. Constable will suffice to summarize my view on the question of whether or not John the Baptist doubted: "An old interpretation of John's question is that he asked it for his disciples' sake, but he never doubted Jesus' identity himself. There is nothing in the text to support this view. Rather John, like Elijah, seems to have become discouraged (cf. Matthew 11:14). Probably this happened because Jesus did not begin to judge sinners immediately."[6]

In the end, we do not need to rewrite John's humanity to protect his legacy; the greatness of the Baptist is found not in a perfect lack of doubt, but in the perfect grace of the One who lifted him out of it.

ENDNOTES:

[1] See the comment by A. T. Robertson when he points out "John's moment of temporary doubt due to his long imprisonment." (Robertson, John the Loyal, p. 225.) Also see the comment by Merrill F. Unger, "John's imprisonment may have given rise to his doubts, but the miraculous evidences of Jesus' person were intended to calm his fears." (Unger, Unger's Bible Handbook, p. 476, comment on Matthew 11:1-6.)

[2] Commenting on John 15:2, even Bill Mounce is forced to admit the obvious when he says: "To be fair, I should point out that the first definition of αἴρω in BDAG [Bauer's Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature] is 'to raise to a higher place or position, lift up, take up, pick up." (Mounce, "One Example of the Passion Mistranslation (John 15:2)," Monday with Mounce blog, April 24, 2023.)

[3] As another example in addition to G. H. Trench, see the commentary by Homer A. Kent, Jr. in The Wycliffe Bible Commentary (Chicago: The Moody Bible Institute, 1962), p. 947, commentary on Matthew 11:3.

[4] In Niemelä's article "Did John the Baptist Lose His Faith While in Prison? Matthew 11:2-3" on the Grace Evangelical Society website, Bob Wilkin even admits that "it is possible that John the Baptist was going through doubts" (see endnote iv, "Editor's note," p. 19).

[5] Zane Hodges, "Assurance: Of the Essence of Saving Faith," Journal of the Grace Evangelical Society (Spring 1997), p. 8, emphasis added (for the html version of the article, see here).

[6] Thomas L. Constable, Notes on Matthew, 2025 Edition, pp. 317-318, comment on Matthew 11:3.