Freethought & Rationalism Archive

sotto voce · 12-06-2011, 11:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Horatio Parker

Quote:

Originally Posted by Duvduv

Why would john the Baptist be so important for the gospel setting??
The gospel setting could have been just fine without him.
The story of Jesus didn't need anchoring specifically in John's environment.
Paul's Jesus did just fine in the epistles without resorting to the Baptist even a single time!

JtB is there because he had a following that the early church wanted to co-opt.

Evidence?

Horatio Parker · 12-06-2011, 11:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sotto voce

Quote:

Originally Posted by Horatio Parker

JtB is there because he had a following that the early church wanted to co-opt.

Evidence?

None. it's speculation.

But if one accepts the notion that Acts represents a harmonization, why couldn't such motives also be present in earlier works?

Not my idea BTW, I read it in Robert Price.

sotto voce · 12-06-2011, 11:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Horatio Parker

Quote:

Originally Posted by sotto voce

Evidence?

None. it's speculation.

But it is stated as fact.

Quote:

But if one accepts the notion that Acts represents a harmonization, why couldn't such motives also be present in earlier works?

They could, of course. But why accept the notion that Acts represents a harmonization?

Quote:

Not my idea BTW, I read it in Robert Price.

A Price too much, methinks.

Horatio Parker · 12-06-2011, 11:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sotto voce

But it is stated as fact.

I don't recall any conditions in the question.

Quote:

But why accept the notion that Acts represents a harmonization?

Why not? Pretty mainstream position, isn't it?

sotto voce · 12-06-2011, 11:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Horatio Parker

Quote:

Originally Posted by sotto voce

But it is stated as fact.

I don't recall any conditions in the question.

Try telling that story to a court of law.

Quote:

But why accept the notion that Acts represents a harmonization?

Quote:

Why not?

Because it undermines one's own legitimacy to assume the illegitimacy of others.

Quote:

Pretty mainstream position, isn't it?

No. Crazy, maybe.

Duvduv · 12-06-2011, 12:00 PM

I am assuming that the Baptist was not the ONLY such person in that universe. So what's the deal about him as a single individual. Indeed, the gospel stories about him do not suggest that he was the only such person.......on the other hand, the writer(s) of the epistles know nothing about him as the preparatory force preceding the "Christ." Probably because the pauline Christ does not need a predecessor.

Quote:

Originally Posted by sotto voce

Quote:

Originally Posted by Duvduv

Yes, but the mystery is why. After all, the Baptist has no mention whatsoever in any traditional Jewish texts.

'A voice of one calling: "In the desert prepare the way for the Lord; make straight in the wilderness a highway for our God.' Isa 40:3 NIV

'See, I will send my messenger, who will prepare the way before me. Then suddenly the Lord you are seeking will come to his temple; the messenger of the covenant, whom you desire, will come," says the Lord Almighty.' Mal 3:1 NIV

Quote:

Even if the Baptist were a wandering preacher calling the people to repent, there must have been many of such people in the early 1st century.

Such as?

Horatio Parker · 12-06-2011, 12:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sotto voce

Try telling that story to a court of law.

We're discussing a character in a story. What does a court of law have to do with it?

Quote:

Because it undermines one's own legitimacy to assume the illegitimacy of others.

We're talking about the Bible, right?

But, just for fun, what assumption of legitimacy or otherwise shall we begin with?

Quote:

Pretty mainstream position, isn't it?

Quote:

No. Crazy, maybe.

Then there are lots of crazy scholars out there...

sotto voce · 12-06-2011, 12:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Duvduv

I am assuming that the Baptist was not the ONLY such person in that universe.

Why?

Quote:

Indeed, the gospel stories about him do not suggest that he was the only such person.

Or that there were any others.

Quote:

......on the other hand, the writer(s) of the epistles know nothing about him as the preparatory force preceding the "Christ."

How is that known?

Duvduv · 12-06-2011, 12:17 PM

Given the religious environment and number of sects that existed in those days I would assume he was the only one. Nowhere do the epistles hint at the Baptist anywhere.

Quote:

Originally Posted by sotto voce

Quote:

Originally Posted by Duvduv

I am assuming that the Baptist was not the ONLY such person in that universe.

Why?

Or that there were any others.

Quote:

......on the other hand, the writer(s) of the epistles know nothing about him as the preparatory force preceding the "Christ."

How is that known?

sotto voce · 12-06-2011, 12:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Duvduv

Given the religious environment and number of sects that existed in those days I would assume he was the only one.

You mean 'not the only one', presumably. Why would any sect appeal to all Jews, including Pharisees and Sadducees?

Quote:

Nowhere do the epistles hint at the Baptist anywhere.

Should they?

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.