The Nir's analysis obliges me to think that
Mcn 9:9 is at the origin of the
entire myth of John killed by Herod, but the mention of Herod in
Mcn 9:9 is fully explained by the clear agenda of pointing out the fact that John is not Jesus, i.e. that John is not the Christ, according to the same 'independent' witness of Herod, as impartial witness.
Now, who were the Jewish-Christians who, in their arrogance, could arrive to think about themselves as
Christs of their own right?
The Ebionites, however, acknowledge that the world was made by Him Who is in reality God, but they propound legends concerning the Christ similarly with Cerinthus and Carpocrates. They live conformably to the customs of the Jews, alleging that they are justified. according to the law, and saying that Jesus was justified by fulfilling the law. And therefore it was, (according to the Ebionites) that (the Saviour) was named (the) Christ of God and Jesus, since not one of the rest (of mankind) had observed completely the law. For if even any other had fulfilled the commandments (contained) in the law, he would have been that Christ. And the ( Ebionites allege) that they themselves also, when in like manner they fulfil (the law), are able to become Christs; for they assert that our Lord Himself was a man in a like sense with all (the rest of the human family).
(
pseudo-Hyppolitus, 7:34)
So my point is that the "rival" hearsay about John the Baptist being risen as 'Jesus', i.e. as 'Christ' — a hearsay denied by Herod in the holy fable —, is invented by Marcion in order to attack the ebionites, with their arrogant claim that,
"when in like manner they fulfil the law, are able to become Christs".
So the ebionites are really the 'followers of John' in
Mcn.