Was the birth story in Luke/Matthew originally referred to John the Baptist

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
Post Reply
Giuseppe
Posts: 6997
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy, or wherever Joseph D.L. is not there

Was the birth story in Luke/Matthew originally referred to John the Baptist

Post by Giuseppe » Thu Jan 16, 2020 11:18 am

In a next post, I will list all the possible reasons to think so.
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.

User avatar
Peter Kirby
Site Admin
Posts: 5392
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 2:13 pm
Location: Santa Clara
Contact:

Re: Was the birth story in Luke/Matthew originally referred to John the Baptist

Post by Peter Kirby » Thu Jan 16, 2020 6:49 pm

Please create a new thread only if there is a sufficient basis for it to create a new and separate discussion.
"... almost every critical biblical position was earlier advanced by skeptics." - Raymond Brown

Giuseppe
Posts: 6997
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy, or wherever Joseph D.L. is not there

Re: Was the birth story in Luke/Matthew originally referred to John the Baptist

Post by Giuseppe » Fri Jan 17, 2020 1:32 am

I meant, by "new post", precisely the writing of a post in this thread. I am assuming that a thread is a set of posts. Hence this thread will be devoted to show the argument.

To my memory , I have always started a thread for a specific argument. I am not doing spam.
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.

User avatar
Peter Kirby
Site Admin
Posts: 5392
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 2:13 pm
Location: Santa Clara
Contact:

Re: Was the birth story in Luke/Matthew originally referred to John the Baptist

Post by Peter Kirby » Fri Jan 17, 2020 4:35 pm

In the future, please have the patience to finish writing the substance of the OP before creating a thread.
"... almost every critical biblical position was earlier advanced by skeptics." - Raymond Brown

Giuseppe
Posts: 6997
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy, or wherever Joseph D.L. is not there

Re: Was the birth story in Luke/Matthew originally referred to John the Baptist

Post by Giuseppe » Sat Jan 18, 2020 9:09 am

I start with Luke 1:28:

The angel went to her and said, “Greetings, you who are full of grace! The Lord is with you.”

And with Luke 1:14:

He will be a joy and delight to you, and many will rejoice because of his birth, 15 for he will be great in the sight of the Lord. He is never to take wine or other fermented drink, and he will be filled with the Holy Spirit even before he is born.

"John" means "YHWH gives grace", hence the sense of these two passages is lost, if who is born is Jesus ("YHWH gives salvation").
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.

Giuseppe
Posts: 6997
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy, or wherever Joseph D.L. is not there

Re: Was the birth story in Luke/Matthew originally referred to John the Baptist

Post by Giuseppe » Sat Jan 18, 2020 9:15 am

In the original birth story (referred to John), John is born naturally (by his human father) and only after, at the 6° month, the angel says to his mother that John will be a prophet.
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.

Giuseppe
Posts: 6997
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy, or wherever Joseph D.L. is not there

Re: Was the birth story in Luke/Matthew originally referred to John the Baptist

Post by Giuseppe » Sat Jan 18, 2020 9:17 am

This resolves the contradiction: how is it possible that the Holy Spirit, conceived by definition as gift of prophecy, serves instead to fecondation of Mary? Originally, the holy spirit served to make it sure that who is born will become a prophet.
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.

Giuseppe
Posts: 6997
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy, or wherever Joseph D.L. is not there

Re: Was the birth story in Luke/Matthew originally referred to John the Baptist

Post by Giuseppe » Sat Jan 18, 2020 9:22 am

The original author, by saying that:

Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit.

(Luke 1:41)
...was introducing the fact that, as effect of the spiritual possession, Elizabeth will sing the Magnificat, and not the interpolated Mary.
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.

Giuseppe
Posts: 6997
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy, or wherever Joseph D.L. is not there

Re: Was the birth story in Luke/Matthew originally referred to John the Baptist

Post by Giuseppe » Sat Jan 18, 2020 9:28 am


66 Everyone who heard this wondered about it, asking, “What then is this child going to be?” For the Lord’s hand was with him.

(Luke 1:66)

The "hand" is interpolated, in the passage above, since Luke 2:40 reports what was "with him" precisely: the "grace of God", i.e. " John" (="YHWH gives grace"):

40 And the child grew and became strong; he was filled with wisdom, and the grace of God was on him

.

Hence the child in question was not Jesus, but John.

But note that here we are dealing still with a Judaizer as the author of the birth story. Judaizers in action, again and again...
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.

Giuseppe
Posts: 6997
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy, or wherever Joseph D.L. is not there

Re: Was the birth story in Luke/Matthew originally referred to John the Baptist

Post by Giuseppe » Sat Jan 18, 2020 9:34 am

And here is where even the original Judaizing author betrayes himself and the his judaization of whatsoever is "John":

to give his people the knowledge of salvation
through the forgiveness of their sins,

(Luke 1:77)

The word “Mandaean” (mandaiyi) refers back to an ancient term, manda “knowledge” or “gnosis”.
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.

Post Reply