aa5874

Based on the writings of Philo, Josephus and Tacitus it is not at all likely that John was baptizing people for the Remission of Sins. Such an act would have been Contrary to Jewish Laws for the remission of Sins.

In the earliest gMark, John Baptized Jesus and then got his head cut-off. That is all.

It would seem that the author was attempting to Historicize his Myth character Jesus by placing him in the presence of John the Baptist, and Pilate.

A very SIMILAR thing was done for the INVENTED character called Saul/Paul in Acts.

Saul/Paul was placed in the presence of Felix, the governor, his wife Drusilla, Festus the governor with King Agrippa and his wife Bernice.

Duvduv

That's a very interesting point. You are 100% correct. In Judaism there is no such thing as remission of sins through immersion in living waters or a mikvah. Immersion provides for ritual purification in certain respects, which is something completely different, and is explicit in the Torah. Why did the author not realize this?
Remission of sins occurs only by virtue of the activities and sacrifices of Yom Kippur in the Temple in those days.
The question is WHY it was necessary to link the Jesus figure with the Baptist/Pilate/Herod background at all. What does it contribute? Especially if the author(s) knew that the Baptist did not exist.

Interestingly enough, the whole famous notion of the "lamb of God" as a sin offering for the people is meant to resemble the goat offering and Azazel of Yom Kippur.
Of course these were not lambs, and the lamb sacrifice of Passover (when Jesus was said to have died) had nothing to do with the remission of sins. Now if the author of John knew his Bible he wouldn't have labeled Jesus the "lamb of God" at all. But this is a whole other subject.

aa5874

Well, that is a clue that the author was NOT a Jew and was not really familiar with Jewish Laws and traditions.
Does it make sense to you to have a Fictional character baptize gMark's main character called Jesus?

John the Baptist, Herod and Pilate were Documented as figures of history in Josephus and other writings.

The inclusion of John the Baptist in gMark may be a clue that it was written AFTER "Antiquities of the Jews" c 92 CE.
These are clues that the author of gJohn was NOT a Jew or was really familiar with Jewish Laws and traditions.

The gMark Jesus story was changed and Jesus was made into a Catholic [Universal] Savior and Messiah.

gMark's Jesus story is NOT about a Catholic Savior and Messiah.

gMark's Jesus story is about the fulfillment of mis-interpreted prophecies.

gMark's Jesus FED the hungry Jews, healed the Sick Jews, raised the dead Jews, cast out Demons from the Evil Jews and showed his OWN disciples that he could Walk on water and Transfigure.

The very disciples of Jesus Abandoned him and later the Jews REJECTED him and he was crucified.

It is EXTREMELY critical that the earliest Canonized Jesus story in gMark be understood. gMark has NOTHING whatsoever to do with UNIVERSAL Salvation by the crucifixion of Jesus.

The Rejection and crucifixion of gMark's Jesus signified the destruction of Jerusalem as found in Isaiah 6.11.

Duvduv

Right, except that the reference by Josephus to the Baptist is considered often to be a later interpolation, as is the one about "known as the Christ."
The knowledge of Judaism would have presumably been much stronger had the first authors written as early as official church history and scholars say they were.

aa5874

Well, you will hardly ever find that ALL EXPERTS agree on all matters. Even with DIRECT evidence Experts may disagree.

How long did it take EXPERTS to figure out that the Earth revolved around the Sun?

Anyhow, I do not consider that the reference to John the Baptist in "Antiqiuities of the Jews" 18 to be a later interpolation.

There is ZERO benfit to the author of gMark to have his Jesus Baptized by a Fictitious character if he wanted people to believe he was writing history.

gMark's Jesus story appears to be fundamentally COMPATIBLE with the writings of Josephus EXCEPT for THE FORGERIES in "Antiquities of the Jews" 20.9.1 and 18.3.3.

The author of gMark did NOT ever claim Jesus started a new religion under the name of Christ or that Jews recognized Jesus as a Messianic ruler.

In gMark, on the day Jesus was arrested and crucified his own supposed disciples had either Betrayed, Abandoned or Denied Jesus.

The disciples of John the Baptist went for the BODY of John and buried it but the 12 disciples of Jesus, in gMark, FLED and NEVER even visited the tomb.

Mark 6.29 The 12 disciples of Jesus did NOT even return for the body of Jesus. The 12 disciples LEFT the body of Jesus to be eaten by Dogs and Scavenger Birds.

gMark's John the Baptist was NOT abandoned by his disciples but made sure he had a proper burial.

Duvduv

Well, one would have to ask the nagging question as to why of all potential individuals of infamy in Judea, Josephus would just HAPPEN to choose the guy who just happened to find his way into the GOSPELS long after Josephus was DEAD........pure coincidence? Of course both this reference and the one to "the brother of James" ("known as the Christ" in passing) who just happened to be historical Savior is also mentioned LONG after Josephus was dead.

As far as I know the bodies in the tombs were not devoured by animals. They were carefully covered and there were no animals around. This was a practice observed in Jerusalem for some decades which then became prohibited by the rabbis. After about a year of decomposition a special crew would come in and gather the bones to be put into a family box.

DCHindley

I've wondered about that myself. The Epistle of Barnabas compares Jesus' death as something akin to the goat sacrifice on the DoA, and Hebrews compares Christ to the High priest who officiates over this ceremony. Yet the Gospels speak of Jesus as the lamb sacrificed on the eve of passover. He cannot be both! Still, I believe that the DoA sacrifice involves "kids" which can mean any small animal, although it usually refers to goats.

They do not even relate to the same thing (atonement for sins vs. rememberance of how God's angel of death "passed over" the Hebrew households that displayed blood from the lamb on the lintels of the door. The former seems to be an attempt to redefine Jesus' death in light of the cessation of temple sacrifices ca 70 CE, and the latter seems to be related to parties who hoped to identify with the Hebrew people so as to avoid the angel of death on the Day of the Lord.

DCH

Duvduv

So how do you think they came up with the idea of combining the pascal lamb idea with the atoning goat? I wonder how the sect of the Epistle to Hebrews viewed this since they saw Jesus as the celestial High Priest on Yom Kippur....Unless the pascal lamb idea really had nothing to do with Jesus per se except for the coincidence of Passover when he was crucified.

aa5874

I did NOT claim that John the Baptist story was a later interpolation in "Antiquities of the Jews" 18.

My position is that the author of gMark attempted to Historicize his Jesus character by claiming that he was Baptized by John, known by Herod, and crucified under Pilate.

Josephus described himself as a Jew who LIVED in Galilee and it does NOT seem like coincidence that gMark used characters found in the writings of Josephus.

DCHindley

I suppose it was due to the technicality that 'kid' (young animal) could include a small lamb. However, in my view, the earliest "Christians" represented the remnants of gentile converts to Judaism in response to Jesus' prediction that the Day of the Lord, including His wrath on sinners, was coming upon mankind quickly. I can see how such converts might rally around the symbol of the sacrificed passover lamb, whose blood protected the Hebrews when God afflicted the Egyptians in Moses' time, especially after Jesus' death. Later, after the destruction of the temple and the unlikeliness of it being rebuilt (say this became pretty much the common opinion when by 90 CE no permission was granted by the Romans), this passover lamb imagery was merged with the sacrificed goat imagery from the DoA, and Jesus becomes a heavenly high priest making atonement for the sins of faithful mankind.

DCH