CALVIN…

“for Christ does not deny that it is an unnatural order for the uneducated multitude and children to be the first to magnify with their voice the coming of the Messiah, but as the truth is wickedly suppressed by those who ought to have been its lawful witnesses, it is not wonderful if God raise up others, and — to their shame — make choice of children. Hence we derive no slight consolation; for though wicked men leave no stone unturned for concealing the reign of Christ, we learn from this passage that their efforts are in vain. They hope that, when some of the multitude, that is carrying forward the kingdom of Christ, shall have been put to death, and others shall be silenced by fear, they will gain their object. But God will disappoint them; for He will sooner give mouths and tongues to stones than allow the kingdom of His Son to be without witnesses.”

CALVIN ON INTERROGATION INCIDENT:

“Whence was the baptism of John? Christ interrogates them about the baptism of John, not only to show that they were unworthy of any authority, because they had despised a holy prophet of God, but also to convict them, by their own reply, of having impudently pretended ignorance of a matter with which they were well acquainted. For we must bear in mind why John was sent, what was his commission, and on what subject he most of all insisted. He had been sent as Christ’s herald. He was not deficient in his duty, and claims nothing more for himself than to prepare the way of the Lord.

(Malachi 3:1; Luke 7:27.)

In short., he had pointed out Christ with the finger, and had declared him to be the only Son of God. From what source then do the scribes mean that the new authority of Christ should be proved, since it had been fully attested by the preaching of John?”

“…it was impossible to acknowledge that John was a servant of God, without acknowledging that he was Himself the Lord.”

ALBERT BARNES:

“The baptism of John – For an account of this, see Matthew 3. The word “baptism” here probably includes all his work. This was his principal employment; and hence he was called the Baptist, or the “Baptizer.” But our Saviour’s question refers “to his whole ministry.” “The ‘ministry of John’ – his baptism, preaching, prophecies was it from God, or not?” If it was, then the inference was clear that Jesus was the Messiah, and then they might easily know by what authority he did those things.

    From heaven – By divine authority, or by the command of God.

    From men – By human authority.”

MATTHEW HENRY:

“The great contenders with him, were, the chief priests and the elders, the judges of two distinct courts: the chief priests presided in the ecclesiastical court, in all matters of the Lord, as they are called; the elders of the people were judges of the civil courts, in temporal matters.”

…..”How they reasoned with themselves, not concerning the merits of the cause, what proofs there were of the divine original of John’s baptism; no, their care was, how to make their part good against Christ. Two things they considered and consulted, in this reasoning with themselves–their credit, and their safety; the same things which they principally aim at, who seek their own things.”

KEN CARLTON:

Jesus modeling presuppositional apologetics: This line of questioning in response holds the objector accountable for his position.  Jesus highlights the merits of the question by conditioning his response upon the integrity of the questioner.  IF JESUS ANSWERED THIS QUESTION AT FACE VALUE — HE WOULD HAVE EFFECTIVELY CONCEDED TO THEIR FALSE/ARBITRARY AUTHORITY CLAIMS (namely to bring God incarnate before the bar of humanistic conventions)!  The questioner has no standing… To take this question as legitimate, is to grant self deception, obfuscation, insubordination, and truth suppression.  The chief priests and elders knew full well the authority of Christ was well attested.  The honest man would bow before Him no matter his position in this life (Psalm 2). So Christ turns the tables with his response.  He shows that the burden of justification rests on mere men, no matter how important or well positioned they consider themselves to be.

BERTRAND RUSSELL:

…on Russell’s 90th birthday party (_New Yorker_, 1963): ” A London lady sat next to him at this party, and over the soup she suggested to him that he was not only the world’s most famous atheist but, by this time, very probably the world’s oldest atheist. “What will you do, Bertie, if it turns out you were wrong?” she asked. “I mean, what if–uh—when the time comes, you should meet Him? What will you say?” Russell was delighted with the question. His bright, birdlike eyes grew even brighter as he contemplated this possible future dialogue, and then he pointed a finger upward and cried, “Why, I should say, ‘God, you gave us insufficient evidence.”’)

link: http://bertrandrussell.org/archives/BRSpapers/2012/agnostic.php