aa5874

So, now you ALREADY KNEW in advance of posting that Josephus was NOT a "prophetic historian" but a CREDIBLE writer and that it is FAR more likely that the John the Baptist did exist as stated.

The DETAILS of Antonigus' Biography is found in Josephus "Antiquities of the Jews" and you USE Josephus' Biography of Antonigus.

maryhelena

Josephus, or whoever is writing under that name, is a prophetic historian. The christian texts are theological/spiritual texts. Thus, if we want to establish that JtB was historical we need to look elsewhere....

Keep in mind that Slavonic Josephus has JtB doing the rounds as early as the rule of Archelaus - from 4 or 1 bc (depending upon when one dates the death of Herod the Great.) But even then there is no indication of when JtB starts his baptizing. The Nativity gospel of James maintains that JtB is destined to be King of Israel. So, different stories, traditions, re JtB. Looks to me that the encounter with Archelaus, and later with Herod (Antipas) that JtB is designed to be one big headache for the Herodian rulers - Antipas even going so far as to think that JC is JtB - having risen from the dead....JtB the Herodian nightmare - and well they needed one after what they did to Antigonus....(Herod the Great sending Antigonus to Mark Antony).

aa5874

You use Josephus for Antigonus and still is making the absurd claim that Josephus is a "prophetic historian" when there are NUMEROUS figures of history that have been corroborated by the writings of Josephus.

maryhelena

Josephus becomes a credible historian when his words are supported by external evidence - until such time as that happens, what he writes is open to question.

Robert Karl Gnuse.
my bolding

Dreams and Dream Reports in the Writing of Josephus, A Traditio-Historical Analysis (or via: amazon.co.uk)
Google Books

maryhelena

And you can guarantee that there is no 'Cuckoo' in the Josephan nest? Come on, aa5874 - placing non-historical figures alongside historical figures is par for the course in any creative writing....

maryhelena

John the Baptist being described in Josephus as a real first century figure? I'm afraid words are not enough to establish historicity of JtB. What would constitute evidence for JtB? External support from other writers would be a start - excluding the gospel faith based, pseudo-historical, storyline. If, like JC, one is going the route of a nobody figure of JtB, somebody so insignificant that his existence would be of no concern to writers - historian or philosophers - then, obviously, there is not going to be external written evidence.

So, one can take Josephus on trust - that he is really writing about a flesh and blood JtB - or one can question Josephus. What is the character of this figure, how is this figure being used in the Josephan storyline.

Compare this Antiquities JtB figure with the historical figure of Antigonus.

(my bolding)

Add to all this the date stamp Josephus puts for JtB - around 37 ce and the storyline re the war between Herod Antipas and Aretas around which time JtB was taken captive to Macherus - and we have 100 years from the time when “Antigonus the Hasmonean was captured and taken to Rome in 63 B.C. He escaped and returned to Palestine in 57 BC.” (Wikipedia).

Again, in 63 ce, Josephus has a story, 100 years from the death of Antigonus in 37 b.c. - when another figure, James this time, is killed. (during a time, as in 37 b.c. when there was a drama re one high priest being side-lined, another being drowned, and the re-instatement of the other - the one high priest being a brother of Mariamne (2nd wife, Hasmonean wife, of Herod the Great), the other high priest being named Ananelus. (in 63 ce the high priest that was Ananus).

Add to this Slavonic Josephus, dating JtB to Archelaus (4 or 1 b.c. to 6 ce.). No birth date or time of starting baptizing being given. Add to this the Nativity gospel of James, which has JtB being destined to be King of Israel (Jesus, also, born to be King of Israel). Actually, the Nativity gospel of James, with it’s census in the time of Augustus - could have it’s storyline dated as early as the census by Augustus in 28 b.c. - gMatthew only saying that JC was born sometime prior to the death of Herod the Great, ie anytime between 37 b.c. and 4 or 1 b.c. (Herod's siege of Jerusalem in 37 b.c.)

It seems to me that Josephus has Antigonus on his mind with his later storylines, his prophetic interpretations, his re-telling of history, with the figurers of JtB and James. And if that is so, then the gospel storyline is also referencing Antigonus. What is a *Christian* after all - nothing less than a follower of a Christ figure, a messiah figure. And as far as Jewish Christians would be concerned that messiah figure is not some nobody carpenter from Nazareth, or wherever, but a leading political figure. Antigonus, being crucified, tied to a cross and scourged, and beheaded - is the primary historical model upon which both JtB and JC have their roots. The gospels tell how the JtB storyline ends and the JC storyline continues - history moves on and historical events after Antigonus are later incorporated into the JC storyline. (the gospel JC being a composite figure).

If one wants to get to grips with early Christian origins - then gLuke has to be put on the shelve for a while. That gospel, with it’s 6 ce census and it’s 15th year of Tiberius - has firmly shut the door to early Christian origins. After gLuke, history regarding early Christian origins is a closed book. JC has taken on a life of his own, completely cut off from the historical figures that gave birth to his pseudo-history. Work from earlier traditions than gLuke and one can discern a developing JC storyline that goes back way beyond gLuke’s 6 c.e. Did not the Jews in gJohn, say that JC was not yet 50 years old? From the census of Augustus in 28 b.c. to the 7th year of Tiberius (Acts of Pilate) in 21 ce - and one has a storyline re JC that has him at 49 years old....Yes, gLuke was necessary - it’s not people that are important - it’s what meaning, what ‘salvation’ one finds in ones own life. Bloodlines are irrelevant - it’s spiritual/intellectual concerns that are vital for human progress. Which was, of course, ‘Paul’s’ forté....

So, no, JtB is not a historical figure - hence arguments regarding whether or not he baptized the gospel JC figure - a figure that has no historical evidence - are exercises in literary criticism and not historical inquiry.

(Keep in mind that Josephus is a prophetic historian - quotes in earlier posts).

Footnote:

maryhelena

Two traditions? That’s an assumption....

“Mental finagling”? Well, now - if one thinks that trying to get to grips with early Christian origins to be a walk in the park - then perhaps you might care to try something else....

aa5874

You are the one who may have some 'Cuckoo' in your nest. You have PRESUMED John the Baptist was NOT a figure of history while you CLING to Josephus' account of ANTIGONUS.

YOU NEED JOSEPHUS, your so-called "prophetic historian" for ANTIGONUS or else your theory goes 'Cuckoo'.

maryhelena

Not at all - the coins, aa5874, the Hasmonean coins, testify to the historicity of Antigonus....:huh:

And don't forget the two independent historians....

Doug Shaver

Today's assignment for all the lurkers . . . .

Calculate the probability that, given Josephus's mention of John the Baptist, anybody would question his existence if he had never been mentioned in any Christian document.