Does KK recognize that since the second century there were reports of the passage being read as if John the Baptist was "scandalized" by Jesus?
The corollary of this is that the opening of the synoptic gospels CAN'T have been in the ur-Gospel. I think you would be well served ACTUALLY READING THE PATRISTIC SOURCE MATERIAL. This is what is wrong with the study of early Christianity. Secret Mark doesn't exist because people don't like certain aspects of its discovery. The Marcionite gospel is ignored because we don't have the gospel "in our possession." So this is a biased and self-serving "study" or "examination." Basically we are allowing the orthodox to determine which texts we can study. Or "garbage in garbage" out.But John is offended when he hears of Christ's miracles— because, <you suggest>, he belongs to the other <god>. I however shall first explain his reason for offence, so that I may the more easily show up the offence of the heretic. When the Lord of hosts himself was by the Word and Spirit of the Father working and preaching upon earth, it was necessary that that apportionment of the Holy Spirit which, after the manner of what was measured out to the prophets, had in John had the function of preparing the ways of the Lord, should now depart from John, having been drawn back again into the Lord, as into its all-inclusive head- spring.1 And so John, being now an ordinary man, one of the multitude, was offended, as indeed a man might be: not because he was hoping for, or thinking of, a different Christ—for he had no ground for such a hope—since he was teaching and doing nothing new. No man can have doubts about one who he knows does not exist, and of whom therefore he entertains neither hopes nor understanding. John however, both as Jew and as prophet, was quite sure that no one is God except the Creator.