Josephus' John the Baptist as Interpolation: An Older Theory

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
Post Reply
Chrissy Hansen
Posts: 546
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2020 2:46 pm

Josephus' John the Baptist as Interpolation: An Older Theory

Post by Chrissy Hansen »

So I like to just research and investigate niche historical theories. Joan of Arc not existing has been a trip (yes that is a thing), and so have the really quite hilarious mythicist parodies arguing Napoleon did not exist (seriously, worth looking at for a good chuckle). That being said, one that has really caught my attention and even caused me quite a bit of agnosticism is questioning the historicity of John the Baptist's relationship with Jesus, specifically challenging the entire authenticity of the Baptism. As a result, I've been deep diving into some older theories and suggestions and of course led me down the rabbit hole of wondering what to do about the passage in Josephus' Antiquities, which most scholars view as authentic.

This led me to find this one scholar: Frederic Huidekoper, Indirect Testimony to the Genuineness of the Gospels, Seventh Edition (London: 1887), 154-156. It is also in his earlier versions (https://www.google.com/books/edition/In ... 1&bsq=john)

He argues in his book that the John the Baptist passage in Josephus' work was most certainly an interpolation. But *not* by a Christian, instead by a follower of John the Baptist's own religious group or some "popular party." He definitely does so in part based on his assumption of validity of the Gospel texts, but even so, I think this may be a theory worth resurrecting.

This was such an interesting idea I'm really surprised I have not seen it supposed in greater detail, especially with the added emphasis we've been seeing on the Mandaean sources from James McGrath and Charles Häberl it opens up a lot of possibilities, not to mention also the questionable nature of the passage as Rivka Nir has really shown, especially with some problematic terminology not usually applied by Jewish sources to baptism.

[As a side note, Huidekoper also supposed the James passage in Josephus may have been an interpolation through use of a marginal comment, very similar to Carrier's argument]
Post Reply