...between the date of the translation and modern understanding.
"Publican" in the modern era refers to someone who keeps a pub; thus the sense of the verses evokes the notion of moral reprobation.
However, the "publican" in the Roman empire was actually a government contractor who was employed to collect taxes-- not an official of the government, but a contractor who worked on a percentage basis. There was of course considerable scope for rapacity and dishonesty in such employment, and the publicans were universally hated, regardless of their individual character. That is, they were hated simply because they were publicans, willing collaborators with the occupying forces.
So the failings represented in the verse encompass both those who violate social norms of "moral" behavior (harlots,) and those who are hated based (essentially) on presumption. I suppose a good modern analogy would be "Congressmen" or "lawyers." I read this as a rebuke to the self-righteous; people who presume that violation of statutory definitions of morality, and membership in a despised group provide the self-righteous with license to despise them.
Yet in spite of such status (outside legal definitions of "morality," and being a member of a despised group,) those individuals may, by their actions (rather than by their status) become part of the kingdom before those same self-righteous people, who may conform to social and legal norms of morality, and may be part of socially respected groups.
I see the following verse as based on the assumption that belief in John involves a commitment to what John preached. That, presumably, the harlots and tax collectors who believed John looked for the coming of the promised one whom John preached. This is seen by the fact that when the one promised by John DID come, they recognized him and followed him--and by that, they become part of the Kingdom. Whereas the authorities who ignored John similarly repudiate Jesus' identity as the one John promised. Thus, the harlots and publicans achieve precedence to the kingdom of God.
The fascination of scripture is its multitude of layers and messages that make it a resource for seekers from so many different backgrounds and with so many different experiences and spiritual goals.
Those who complain that scripture "contradicts itself" and those who attempt feats of hermaneutic gymnastics to prove that there are no "contradictions" alike seem to miss the point: scripture is an endless trove to be gathered and explored and scrutinized and discovered, over and over again, to achieve internal wisdom and insight along the individual spiritual path.
exigetically,
Bright
= new reply since forum marked as read