Came across this interesting description,
Quoting Professor George Howard, translator of Shem Tob:
In regard to theology, Shem-tob’s Hebrew Matthew is heretical according to the standard of traditional Christianity. It never identifies Jesus with the Messiah. (See Reference Note 1.) John the Baptist is given an exalted role (even takes on messianic traits), — Shem-Tob’s text envisions the salvation of the Gentiles only in the Messianic era.
** you do not have permission to see this link **
My question, if that can be traced back as far as some think, can we consider that there may have been a rivalry between the followers of each man driving the John the Baptist storyline in the gospels. Admittedly this is entirely speculation; yet the gospels give John an increasingly intimate relationship with Jesus. First he is said to herald Jesus coming; later they are cousins.
Thus while embarrassment gives us reason to think the story wasn’t made up, we might never the less consider that rivalry drove the story line. Consider, a human Jesus baptised by John. This claim wouldn’t be subject to embarrassment until later Christians began thinking of him as, in some way, divine. However, story gets retained because of the significance of John: John’s approval,if you will.
I have no answer to that question, but I have wondered a related question – does John the Baptist explain the eye-witnesses to the resurrection? Mark says repeatedly that Jesus is followed by crowds of people who believe he is John resurrected, and also that king Herod (who executed John) believes that is who he is.
So could the confusion between John and Jesus extend even further, to where stories that were about John were retold as stories about Jesus, and people who met Jesus believed that they were meeting John, the leader of Christianity, who had been executed by the Romans and resurrected?
worrallj said
So could the confusion between John and Jesus extend even further, to where stories that were about John were retold as stories about Jesus, and people who met Jesus believed that they were meeting John, the leader of Christianity, who had been executed by the Romans and resurrected?
What confusion? Is the story true? Let’s assume it is. John wasn’t the leader of Christianity. Mark never makes that claim. He never says that people thought Jesus was John after his resurrection. It is however, the purpose of Mark’s gospel to communicate that no one understood who Jesus was when he was alive. Mark wants to tell his audience that Jesus was an important person but also wants to explain why no one knew this. It’s certainly possible that stories about John were retold about Jesus, but how do we go about determining that?
Well maybe I’m misunderstanding something but Mark 6:14-26 describes how when King Herod hears about Jesus, after he’d executed John and his followers had placed him in a tomb, now feared that John had been resurrected. In Mark 8:27-28 Jesus asks the disciples who he is and they say that others say he is either John the Baptist or Elijah.
Your right John wasn’t leader of christianity that was sloppy by me but he seems like leader of the related strain of Judaism that lead to Christianity. In one scene people ask Jesus why John’s disciples fast but Jesus’s don’t, which suggested to me they were both heads of a religion and people were unsure of the relationship between them.
worrallj said
Well maybe I’m misunderstanding something but Mark 6:14-26 describes how when King Herod hears about Jesus, after he’d executed John and his followers had placed him in a tomb, now feared that John had been resurrected. In Mark 8:27-28 Jesus asks the disciples who he is and they say that others say he is either John the Baptist or Elijah.Your right John wasn’t leader of christianity that was sloppy by me but he seems like leader of the related strain of Judaism that lead to Christianity. In one scene people ask Jesus why John’s disciples fast but Jesus’s don’t, which suggested to me they were both heads of a religion and people were unsure of the relationship between them.
Had to grab a Bible and check Mark 6:14-26. This would seem to suggest Jesus was well-known if indeed Herod knew about him and that there were more than a few (20?) followers!
worrallj said
Well maybe I’m misunderstanding something but Mark 6:14-26 describes how when King Herod hears about Jesus, after he’d executed John and his followers had placed him in a tomb, now feared that John had been resurrected. In Mark 8:27-28 Jesus asks the disciples who he is and they say that others say he is either John the Baptist or Elijah.
Yea, I still think that is covered by considering if the story is true rather than part of Mark’s No one understood Jesus architecture.
I don’t mean to suggest Mark is making it up. Geza Vermes, for example, described the “death and resurrection” as seeming to hit Jesus disciples out of the blue so it doesn’t surprise me that there is a radical rethinking of Jesus after his purported resurrection.
It is however, at least possible, that Mark chose his stories by how well they fit with his understanding
P.S yea, it is widely believed that John and Jesus were Apocalypticists. It’s also interesting that John goes from being some guy in the wilderness to Jesus’ cousin
spiker said
Yea, I still think that is covered by considering if the story is true rather than part of Mark’s No one understood Jesus architecture.
I don’t mean to suggest Mark is making it up. Geza Vermes, for example, described the “death and resurrection” as seeming to hit Jesus disciples out of the blue so it doesn’t surprise me that there is a radical rethinking of Jesus after his purported resurrection.
It is however, at least possible, that Mark chose his stories by how well they fit with his understanding
P.S yea, it is widely believed that John and Jesus were Apocalypticism. It’s also interesting that John goes from being some guy in the wilderness to Jesus’ cousin
Are you saying that Mark’s descriptions of people’s beliefs about the resurrection of John are more likely metaphorical? It is similarly said in Luke & Matthew, but true they may have just copied from Mark. I don’t think its in John, is it? I suppose early authors weren’t too worried about paralleling Jesus with other characters, as in Jesus Barabbas, so it makes sense.
My questions were motivated by how the basic narrative of the resurrection is paralleled so well by something that the gospels say was believed about John prior to it happening to Jesus, plus the fact that John seemed to be preaching a predecessor to Christianity with his ‘baptism for the forgiveness of sins.’
Can you think of anyway to decide which is more likely? I agree its interesting how John’s relationship to Jesus morphs.
Judith said
Had to grab a Bible and check Mark 6:14-26. This would seem to suggest Jesus was well-known if indeed Herod knew about him and that there were more than a few (20?) followers!
Yes very true. I don’t think that means there couldn’t have been many people who were confused about which and what each one represented. And some people may only have heard of one or the other. Especially in those days before photos and TV and wikipedia, having heard of Jesus or John would not have been the same thing as recognizing them when you saw them or fact checking which had done what. The two characters did rather similar things, and I don’t think its unfair to describe Jesus as a spiritual offspring of John, and the gospels do describe this kind of confusion among at least some people, including Herod who you’d think is a rather well informed guy.
worrallj said
Are you saying that Mark’s descriptions of people’s beliefs about the resurrection of John are more likely metaphorical?
No, look at the context. What did I ask? I asked if Mark’s account was true. I also asserted that PERHAPS Mark selected his stories
by how they fit with his beliefs. But asking questions isn’t always suggesting answers. Sometimes it’s a matter of realizing the issue is more complicated than we realize
My questions were motivated by how the basic narrative of the resurrection is paralleled so well by something that the gospels say was believed about John prior to it happening to Jesus, plus the fact that John seemed to be preaching a predecessor to Christianity with his ‘baptism for the forgiveness of sins.’
I’m guessing one can find all sorts of parallels if we don’t pay to much attention to how vague they are. I don’t doubt that many of John’s followers may have had similar beliefs. Shem Tov Matthew suggests as much (is it an authentic document?) There’s way too much leeway granted for parallel’s. It seems one can prove what ever they want with Parallels; no matter how vague or meaningless.
You and I are both people. You have two eyes. I have two eyes. You have a nose, I have a nose. You have skin, I have skin.. Look at all the parallels!!!
BDEhrman
FreedomBen
evgendob
Robert
1 Guest(s)