What is sure and not sure about John the Baptist

[Giuseppe]

In my view, at the moment, what is sure about John the Baptist:

• that John is made precursor of Jesus to domesticate a rival figure named John

• that the Baptist Passage in Josephus is entirely interpolated

• that followers of John are equally domesticated (see in Acts what is said about Apollos of Alexandria)

What is not sure about John:

was he a judaizing icon or a gentilizing icon?

• reasons pro John being a judaizing icon:
  
  • Marcion hated him
  • possibly the Book of Revelation was originally connected with John the Baptist

• reasons pro John being a gentilizing icon:
  
  • Apollos in Acts (and in Paul, also) appears to be a gentile figure
  • John appears as hero in a gentile religion: Mandeism

[Giuseppe]

The fact that the same figure (John) became a judaizing icon for some Christians and a gentilizing icon for other Christians may be used as evidence of the fact that the name 'John' was merely another name candidate for the name of the Messiah, later supplanted by the name of Jesus.

For example, the gematria of 'Serpent' (I go to memory) is the same of "Messiah", hence you have a Jewish (gematrical) origin for the clearly gentile belief (Naassenes, Ophites, etc) that the Serpent was a positive figure against the evil demiurge YHWH.

I think that the same process went with the name 'John': the gematria allowed his identity with 'Messiah', hence, a Jewish origin for the claim, apparently not in contradiction with the gentile co-optation of John as the anti-YHWH hero of Mandeism.

Hence the 'fame' of John-Baptist is due solely to gematrical reason, just as the 'fame' of the Genesiac Serpent.

[Charles Wilson]

John is of the Mishmarot Group "Bilgah".

THAT is certain, whether in a Literary Setting (...as a Fictional Story written around the Passover of 4 BCE) or Real one (It actually happened and was reported by a Nicholas of Damascus or someone in the Priestly Groupings).