Was John the Baptist invented?

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Was John the Baptist invented?

Post by Giuseppe »

So you consider the account of Josephus about JtB (the birth of a popular legend about the "effects" of the his death on the military defeat of the his killer) very possible and realistic.

But. is not that birth an event per se so rare and unique to be happened really?

My question is legitimate: how much expected is a similar event?
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.
User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8994
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Was John the Baptist invented?

Post by Ben C. Smith »

With respect to Josephus' passage about John the baptist, Peter's is the case to beat, IMHO: http://peterkirby.com/john-the-baptist-authentic.html.

I will be happy to consider the passage an interpolation just as soon as I see his overall points on that blog post knocked down one by one, with at least a couple of arguments against the passage still standing.
Last edited by Ben C. Smith on Sun Dec 10, 2017 7:31 am, edited 1 time in total.
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ
OptimisticEndeavor
Posts: 4
Joined: Mon Dec 11, 2017 9:13 pm

Re: Was John the Baptist invented?

Post by OptimisticEndeavor »

MrMacSon wrote: Sun Dec 10, 2017 1:34 am .
Lena Einhorn has also noted there are arguments against Josephus’ reference to John being authentic -
  • John the Baptist is not at all mentioned in De bello Judaico, although when it was written in the 70s, John had been dead for several decades.
  • The appearance of John the Baptist is very sudden, considering his implied importance. He is mentioned in one single paragraph, where it is stated that some Jews hold the opinion that God’s displeasure with the killing of John the Baptist is the cause of Herod Antipas losing a war.
  • The paragraph disturbs the flow of the narrative. It is fitted in between the description of how Tiberius orders Vitellius to punish Aretas (A.J. 18.115), and that of how Vitellius prepares this punishment (A.J. 18.120). In other words, the text would flow considerably better if the paragraph on John the Baptist was not in the middle.
  • In the paragraph on John the Baptist, it says that Herod Antipas sent John to the castle of Macherus to have him put to death. But in the previous paragraph, Josephus writes that Macherus is controlled not by Herod Antipas, but by Aretas, the man with whom Herod Antipas is at war.
  • In this paragraph, Josephus shows an atypical reverence toward John the Baptist, considering the contempt with which he treats other messianic leaders.
  • If we were to rely on the information supplied in this paragraph, John the Baptist would have been killed later than Jesus is assumed to have been killed.
On the other hand, there are undoubtedly elements in the gospel texts themselves which strengthen the conclusion that John the Baptist was an authentic, and important, person. He is one of the best examples of the so called “criterion of embarrassment” for authenticity.

John’s presence is in the gospel narratives a complication; he must be deferred to, and at the same time he must be diminished (“I am not worthy to stoop down and untie the thong of his sandals.”) He obviously can not be ignored. This, in fact, increases the likelihood that John has existed, and been of great importance.

http://lenaeinhorn.se/wp-content/upload ... .11.25.pdf

Einhorm also noted that "The last major messianic leader to be named by Josephus before the emergence of the Egyptian [who Einhorn thinks is the basis for the NT Jesus] was Theudas."

She noted that "Theudas (A.J. 20.97-99), shares distinct characteristics with John the Baptist: like John, Theudas gathered his followers by the river Jordan; like John, he was arrested by the authorities; and they “cut off his head, and carried it to Jerusalem”. "
Theudas display significant similarities with John the Baptist, again, about fifteen to twenty years too late:
  • Just like John the Baptist, Theudas is a spiritual leader who brings his followers to the Jordan river.
  • Just like John the Baptist, Theudas is killed by the authorities, and in the same manner: they sever his head.
  • The New Testament describes John the Baptist as the forerunner of Jesus. Similarly, Theudas is the last major messianic claimant to be named by Josephus before the emergence of ”the Egyptian”.
  • Just as the New Testament describes John the Baptist and Jesus in similar terms, so does Josephus describe Theudas and the Egyptian in similar terms. Josephus, however, uses negative terms: he talks about them as aspiring prophets (in the case of the Egyptian, “false prophet”), and he calls them both “magician” or “sorcerer” (γόης). This negative portrayal is something to factor in when evaluating the logic behind a possible time shift in the writing of the Gospels.
If John the Baptist of the New Testament is identical to the messianic leader called Theudas in Antiquitates Judaicae, then, of course, A.J 18.116-119 would be a later Christian interpolation. And the mentioning of Theudas in Acts would be part of what one might call the Lukan subtext,

http://lenaeinhorn.se/wp-content/upload ... .11.25.pdf
As others have pointed out, sudden or intrusive passages into narratives appears to be very characteristic of Josephus.

Also, other important wannabe Messiah's were spoken of in less than a paragraph. Nothing unique or special about the length or "suddenness" of John's reference.

Atypical reverence? How so? Because he didn't completely rip into John? Is it impossible for Josephus to have a neutral to slightly positive view of someone like John?

And I'm not sure how John being killed later than Jesus supposedly did somehow unauthenticates the reference. If anything, this is proof that it was written by a non Christian.
User avatar
Jax
Posts: 1443
Joined: Sun Aug 06, 2017 6:10 am

Re: Was John the Baptist invented?

Post by Jax »

I have to say that after reading the write up of Peter Kirby that was supplied by Ben Smith above http://peterkirby.com/john-the-baptist-authentic.html that I am fairly of the opinion that the account in Josephus is indeed more likely to be authentic to that work.

This, for me anyway, begs the question as to whether this account of JtB in Josephus is the source for 'Mark' in writing his Gospel. If so this would indicate a date for 'Mark' post the mid 90's CE.
Post Reply