Justin's silence on John the Baptist is very strong

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
Giuseppe
Posts: 6744
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Justin's silence on John the Baptist is very strong

Post by Giuseppe » Thu Oct 17, 2019 12:02 pm

If John the Baptist had really existed, how to explain that Justin, in his Apologies, where he had inevitably to report, ignored John
(as he does not know Paul). If John the Baptist was a real person, if what he says about him in the Gospels was true and was in the Gospels of Justin's time, there is
in the Apologies a passage where it is impossible for Justin not to speak of it.
It is the one that relates to the "prophets who announced Jesus, our Christ, and who succeeded one another from generation to generation "(I Apol., 31).

In short, by Justin's time, John the Baptist was not yet invented.

But, then, without John, proto-Mark ceases to be a separationist gospel.
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.

Charles Wilson
Posts: 1357
Joined: Thu Apr 03, 2014 8:13 am

Re: Justin's silence on John the Baptist is very strong

Post by Charles Wilson » Thu Oct 17, 2019 6:37 pm

Giuseppe, sometimes you drive me nuts, but here, you are onto something. I'm just not so sure you are aware of what it is :D .
Giuseppe wrote:In short, by Justin's time, John the Baptist was not yet invented.
Close, oh, so close.

"From the fact that the "Jesus Stories" were written from Source Stories, it does not follow that the "Source Stories" were about "Jesus"."

It is "JESUS" that had not been fully fleshed out! In the adaptation of the Original Story, John and a Priest were always present. It was when the "Jesus" character was invented that the problems began. The Prophets lasted until John. The creators of the New Religion are telling you what they are doing. After John comes the rewrite - the Story gets Cut-'n-Pasted into a story of a savior/god.

John 1:

[15] (John bore witness to him, and cried, "This was he of whom I said, `He who comes after me ranks before me, for he was before me.'")
...
[27] even he who comes after me, the thong of whose sandal I am not worthy to untie."

After Bilgah comes Immer.
***
[28] This took place in Bethany beyond the Jordan, where John was baptizing.
[29]The next day he saw Jesus coming toward him, and said, "Behold, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world!

A Semitic Term, "Lamb of God". (See, Pettinato, Ebla, animal name paired with a god name. Ex.: " 'nmmr-Yah"=> "Panther-of-Yah", etc.)
***
[30] This is he of whom I said, `After me comes a man who ranks before me, for he was before me.'

After Bilgah comes Immer.
***
[31] I myself did not know him; but for this I came baptizing with water, that he might be revealed to Israel."

To your point, Giuseppe!
***
[32] And John bore witness, "I saw the Spirit descend as a dove from heaven, and it remained on him.
[33] I myself did not know him; but he who sent me to baptize with water said to me, `He on whom you see the Spirit descend and remain, this is he who baptizes with the Holy Spirit.'

There are Roman fingerprints here! All you need you see is "Holy Spirit". The Story has been hijacked for Roman use. It was not John who was created. It was the Jesus character. In fact, the Original has been hijacked twice. Where does "Dove" come from? (Hint: Titus).

Again, see Acts, "We didn't know there was a Holy Spirit" (Note to comment on previous Thread: Whether the Baptism was under the "Name" of "John" or the "Holy Spirit" is of no effect here. The Baptism of John is replaced by the Baptism of the Holy Spirit before the Baptism of John is barely known! The deification of Titus is replaced by the poisoning of Titus and the Ascension of "Lord-God Domitian". Don't multiply Metaphysical Entities before exhausting historical candidates.)

Giuseppe, relax, take a deep breath and look at your assumptions.
You're onto something. :thumbup:

CW

User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 7213
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Justin's silence on John the Baptist is very strong

Post by Ben C. Smith » Thu Oct 17, 2019 6:46 pm

Charles Wilson wrote:
Thu Oct 17, 2019 6:37 pm
Giuseppe, sometimes you drive me nuts, but here, you are onto something.
I may as well set this sentiment to music, it happens often enough.
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ

andrewcriddle
Posts: 1777
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 12:36 am

Re: Justin's silence on John the Baptist is very strong

Post by andrewcriddle » Sat Oct 19, 2019 2:22 am

The Dialogue With Trypho mentions John the Baptist e.g.
Justin: Now, it is possible to see among us women and men who possess gifts of the Spirit of God; so that it was prophesied that the powers enumerated by Isaiah would come upon Him, not because He needed power, but because these would not continue after Him. And let this be a proof to you, namely, what I told you was done by the Magi from Arabia, who as soon as the Child was born came to worship Him, for even at His birth He was in possession of His power; and as He grew up like all other men, by using the fitting means, He assigned its own [requirements] to each development, and was sustained by all kinds of nourishment, and waited for thirty years, more or less, until John appeared before Him as the herald of His approach, and preceded Him in the way of baptism, as I have already shown. And then, when Jesus had gone to the river Jordan, where John was baptizing, and when He had stepped into the water, a fire was kindled in the Jordan; and when He came out of the water, the Holy Ghost lighted on Him like a dove, [as] the apostles of this very Christ of ours wrote. Now, we know that he did not go to the river because He stood in need of baptism, or of the descent of the Spirit like a dove; even as He submitted to be born and to be crucified, not because He needed such things, but because of the human race, which from Adam had fallen under the power of death and the guile of the serpent, and each one of which had committed personal transgression. For God, wishing both angels and men, who were endowed with free-will, and at their own disposal, to do whatever He had strengthened each to do, made them so, that if they chose the things acceptable to Himself, He would keep them free from death and from punishment; but that if they did evil, He would punish each as He sees fit. For it was not His entrance into Jerusalem sitting on an ass, which we have showed was prophesied, that empowered Him to be Christ, but it furnished men with a proof that He is the Christ; just as it was necessary in the time of John that men have proof, that they might know who is Christ. For when John remained by the Jordan, and preached the baptism of repentance, wearing only a leathern girdle and a vesture made of camels' hair, eating nothing but locusts and wild honey, men supposed him to be Christ; but he cried to them, 'I am not the Christ, but the voice of one crying; for He that is stronger than I shall come, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear.' Isaiah 1:27 And when Jesus came to the Jordan, He was considered to be the son of Joseph the carpenter; and He appeared without comeliness, as the Scriptures declared; and He was deemed a carpenter (for He was in the habit of working as a carpenter when among men, making ploughs and yokes; by which He taught the symbols of righteousness and an active life); but then the Holy Ghost, and for man's sake, as I formerly stated, lighted on Him in the form of a dove, and there came at the same instant from the heavens a voice, which was uttered also by David when he spoke, personating Christ, what the Father would say to Him: 'You are My Son: this day have I begotten You;' [the Father] saying that His generation would take place for men, at the time when they would become acquainted with Him: 'You are My Son; this day have I begotten you.'

Andrew Criddle

Giuseppe
Posts: 6744
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Justin's silence on John the Baptist is very strong

Post by Giuseppe » Sat Oct 19, 2019 3:23 am

andrewcriddle wrote:
Sat Oct 19, 2019 2:22 am
The Dialogue With Trypho mentions John the Baptist e.g.
But the Dialogue with Trypho was not written by Justin.


The Dialogue (35) assumes a Marcion who is already famous at a global* level. But Marcion was expelled from the Church of Rome only in 144 CE. He couldn't be known nor hated by Justin if Justin had written really the Dialogue.

The Dialogue talks about facts preceding that date.

Ireneus says that the Marcionism became a great church under Anicetus (3:4,3). And Anicetus was active until to 166 CE. It is impossible that Marcion had so many disciples before 145-150.

Hence the Dialogue can't be written by the Justin author of the Apologies.

*: relatively speaking.
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.

User avatar
neilgodfrey
Posts: 3568
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 4:08 pm

Re: Justin's silence on John the Baptist is very strong

Post by neilgodfrey » Sat Oct 19, 2019 3:34 am

I recall reading in a scholarly journal an argument for various interpolations into the Dialogue with Trypho (they included the "memoirs of the apostles" sections) but have had no luck in tracing that article since. Author? Journal? Year? All slipped through the memory hole.

I don't suppose anyone here can help?
vridar.org Musings on biblical studies, politics, religion, ethics, human nature, tidbits from science

andrewcriddle
Posts: 1777
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 12:36 am

Re: Justin's silence on John the Baptist is very strong

Post by andrewcriddle » Sat Oct 19, 2019 3:56 am

Giuseppe wrote:
Sat Oct 19, 2019 3:23 am
andrewcriddle wrote:
Sat Oct 19, 2019 2:22 am
The Dialogue With Trypho mentions John the Baptist e.g.
But the Dialogue with Trypho was not written by Justin.


The Dialogue (35) assumes a Marcion who is already famous at a global* level. But Marcion was expelled from the Church of Rome only in 144 CE. He couldn't be known nor hated by Justin if Justin had written really the Dialogue.

The Dialogue talks about facts preceding that date.

Ireneus says that the Marcionism became a great church under Anicetus (3:4,3). And Anicetus was active until to 166 CE. It is impossible that Marcion had so many disciples before 145-150.

Hence the Dialogue can't be written by the Justin author of the Apologies.

*: relatively speaking.
The Dialogue with Trypho was probably written c 160 CE.
See https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=wGs ... on&f=false

Andrew Criddle

Giuseppe
Posts: 6744
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Justin's silence on John the Baptist is very strong

Post by Giuseppe » Sat Oct 19, 2019 5:49 am

andrewcriddle wrote:
Sat Oct 19, 2019 3:56 am

The Dialogue with Trypho was probably written c 160 CE.
See https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=wGs ... on&f=false
But Dialogue 128 reveals that the his author knew the heresy of Sabellius (220 CE) or the view of Athenagoras of Atene (170) who compared the Logos to the ray of sun:

And do not suppose, sirs, that I am speaking superfluously when I repeat these words frequently: but it is because I know that some wish to anticipate these remarks, and to say that the power sent from the Father of all which appeared to Moses, or to Abraham, or to Jacob, is called an Angel because He came to men (for by Him the commands of the Father have been proclaimed to men); is called Glory, because He appears in a vision sometimes that cannot be borne; is called a Man, and a human being, because He appears arrayed in such forms as the Father pleases; and they call Him the Word, because He carries tidings from the Father to men: but maintain that this power is indivisible and inseparable from the Father, just as they say that the light of the sun on earth is indivisible and inseparable from the sun in the heavens; as when it sinks, the light sinks along with it; so the Father, when He chooses, say they, causes His power to spring forth, and when He chooses, He makes it return to Himself. In this way, they teach, He made the angels.

http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/01289.htm

Hence the Dialogue was written around 220 CE.
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.

User avatar
Jax
Posts: 759
Joined: Sun Aug 06, 2017 6:10 am

Re: Justin's silence on John the Baptist is very strong

Post by Jax » Sat Oct 19, 2019 10:05 am

Ben C. Smith wrote:
Thu Oct 17, 2019 6:46 pm
Charles Wilson wrote:
Thu Oct 17, 2019 6:37 pm
Giuseppe, sometimes you drive me nuts, but here, you are onto something.
I may as well set this sentiment to music, it happens often enough.
I submit this as a base (or bass as it were). ;)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wpkRK9yWwrM

Joseph D. L.
Posts: 615
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2017 2:10 am

Re: Justin's silence on John the Baptist is very strong

Post by Joseph D. L. » Sat Oct 19, 2019 6:18 pm

Giuseppe wrote:
Sat Oct 19, 2019 3:23 am
andrewcriddle wrote:
Sat Oct 19, 2019 2:22 am
The Dialogue With Trypho mentions John the Baptist e.g.
But the Dialogue with Trypho was not written by Justin.


The Dialogue (35) assumes a Marcion who is already famous at a global* level. But Marcion was expelled from the Church of Rome only in 144 CE. He couldn't be known nor hated by Justin if Justin had written really the Dialogue.
So you compare the contents of the Dialogue with the writings of a man who is a known liar and didn't have any records about the things he claimed?
The Dialogue talks about facts preceding that date.

Ireneus says that the Marcionism became a great church under Anicetus (3:4,3). And Anicetus was active until to 166 CE. It is impossible that Marcion had so many disciples before 145-150.

Hence the Dialogue can't be written by the Justin author of the Apologies.

*: relatively speaking.
Let's get a few things straight.

Marcion was active in Judaism during the reign of Trajan, but was excommunicated due to his support for Hadrian. The dates Tertullian and Irenaeus ascribed to him are entirely baseless.

Further, it may very well be (and this is something I do think) that the Marcus Pmopius mentioned at the end of Dialogue is in fact Marcion himself, and that the Dialogue is just a re-edited version of an earlier work, like that of Jason and Papiscus.

Post Reply