Why John the Baptist was connected artificially with Dositheus and the Magus

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
Post Reply
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Why John the Baptist was connected artificially with Dositheus and the Magus

Post by Giuseppe »

In this Phd thesis I have found a good explanation about why John the Baptist was connected with Dositheus and Simon Magus. The reason was not, as René Salm would like to think, that John the Baptist was a Gnostic preacher, but that John was considered a rival Messiah, and as such he deserved to be partially defamed by mere association with those bad guys.

But the temptation ot use the association of John with Simon in the Homilies as support for the existence of a Johannite gnostic movement in first or second century Samaria must be resisted. It is significant that the direct references to "the disciples of John" in the Recognitions do not attribute gnostic doctrines and speculations to them, but place their views within the framework of Jewish expectations. Further, the Recognitions does not directly link John with Simon and Dositheus, and does not couple it s references to the heretical "disciples of John" with outright opposition to John personally. This is in contrast to the Homilies which, by the application of the theory of pairs to John and Jesus, betrays a hatred of John himself. The best explanation o f this is that the writer of the Homilies was so concerned to combat those who set up John as greater than Jesus that he was prepared to attack the traditionally honoured forerunner of Jesus. The alleged connection of John with Simon and Dositheus, and the suggestion that he was a hemerobaptist, are completely understandable as part of this violent polemic. "The link with Simon and Dositheus was in fact one of the biggest insults that could be directed against John”.
Schnackenburg's considered verdict is that this particular testimony of the Homilies is "tendenzious" and that the novelist has invented this idea of John the Baptist as the spiritual father of the Samaritan gnostics. This judgement is confirmed by the lack of any indication in the Pseudo-Clementine literature, or elsewhere, that John held an honoured place in either the Dosithean or Simonian systems.
This excursus has revealed a lack of reliable evidence in support of the claim that some of John's followers developed views of a gnostic character.

Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Why John the Baptist was connected artificially with Dositheus and the Magus

Post by Giuseppe »

So the rival Messiahs were:
  • John the Baptist
  • Dositheus
  • Simon Magus
While Dositheus (and after him the Magus) was portrayed as an anti-demiurgist, in addition to be a rival Samaritan Messiah, John the Baptist was not even a Samaritan.

So I have to recognize that there was really a rival sect of disciples of John the Baptist, entirely within the Judaism.

But Pilate was part of the Dosithean tradition, Dositheus having been defeated just by Pilate.


By now it is clear that the correct question to ask is the following:

What happened for Pilate to end up from one (Dosithean) tradition into another (Christian) tradition?
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Why John the Baptist was connected artificially with Dositheus and the Magus

Post by Giuseppe »

The Samaritan Dositheus obviously was not an anti-demiurgist, but he was portrayed as such by the tendentious propaganda, the same propaganda that defamed partially John the Baptist by connecting him with Dositheus and the Magus.

At contrary, the Magus, a fictional character, was entirely an anti-demiurgist icon from the beginning. Paul-Louis Couchoud was drastic: the Magus was allegory of Marcion.
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Why John the Baptist was connected artificially with Dositheus and the Magus

Post by Giuseppe »

What has to be investigated is also the role of early anti-Christian Jews in labelling polemically Jesus as a mere Samaritan.

Possibly this book will be of help, even if his author is a dogmatic anti-mythicist:

Image


Assuming that the Jews denigrated Jesus as 'Samaritan' only for sake of polemic, then they did first the identity Jesus == Dositheus.

In this case, if 'Samaritan' was only an insulting epitet addressed to Jesus by Jewish opponents, then I would go back to what I had written in this post:

Giuseppe wrote: Wed Jun 01, 2022 10:35 pm the corollary of what I have described above, is that Pilate is mentioned implicitly in the same incipit of Mcn (1:3-7):


when Jesus came down from above, he appeared and began teaching in the synagogue.
And all were puzzled at the gracious words coming out of His mouth. And they said, ‘Isn’t this Joseph’s son? Let be! What have we to do with you, Jesus! Have you come to destroy us? I know who you are – the Holy One of God.’ But Jesus rebuked him and said to them: ‘No doubt you will quote to me the proverb, “Physician, heal yourself!”’

That "let be!" is very illuminating, and I am very grateful to prof Vinzent for having pointed out it with so great emphasis. It allows to realize with certainty what is the logic of the enemies of Jesus in Mcn:

if Jesus is the Samaritan messiah "son of Joseph", then he has to be crucified by the famous slayer of Samaritans: Pilate.

So the same incipit has to be re-written for the insiders how it follows:


when Jesus came down from above, he appeared and began teaching in the synagogue.
And all were puzzled at the gracious words coming out of His mouth. And they said, ‘Isn’t this Joseph’s son? Let be! [==let him be killed by Pilate!] What have we to do with you, Jesus! Have you come to destroy us? I know who you are – the Holy One of God.’ But Jesus rebuked him and said to them: ‘No doubt you will quote to me the proverb, “Physician, heal yourself!”’


The problem with this view is that a such irony would be too much cryptical and self-harm.

Mark introduces Pilate without irony at all, as a "fact" inherited by some vague tradition.
schillingklaus
Posts: 645
Joined: Sat Dec 11, 2021 11:17 pm

Re: Why John the Baptist was connected artificially with Dositheus and the Magus

Post by schillingklaus »

John is an excessive Euhemerization and Judaization of Dositheos.
Post Reply