Biblical Criticism & History Forum - earlywritings.com

Note that Sinouhe has explained very well the midrash behind John the Baptist. What he has yet to explain is why all that midrash is not able to justify the blunt entry of John the Baptist.

By "blunt entry" I don't mean the mere question of "who comes before who" according to prophecies, but the total absence of explanations about the identity of the Precursor. Who is he? A prophet? A publican? A pharisee? A baptizer? A good man?

If you answer that John is Elijah, then the your answer is equivalent to a confession of ignorance about who is really John.

Giuseppe wrote: ↑Sat Jun 10, 2023 3:32 am

Sinouhe wrote: ↑Sat Jun 10, 2023 1:22 am 1/ Fulfills all Jewish expectations
2/ Therefore, he is the Messiah

how do you explain the embarrassment of having Jesus baptized by John? Was such embarrassment worthy of being tolerated, under the Markan priority?

Under the marcionite priority, surely yes!

Paul the Uncertain wrote: ↑Sat Jun 10, 2023 2:20 am Even at the level of basic storytelling craft, there are excellent reasons for delaying the main character in order for them to make a dramatic entrance, which requires something to have happened, somebody to have done something, before the main character enters.

I don't question the delay of the principal hero of the story (you are right on that). What I am considering as an anomaly, under the Markan priority, is the blunt entry of John the Baptist, ex abrupto.

Are you, or Sinouhe, or Peter, able to explain it? I can explain it only as a survived trace of the blunt descent of Jesus from above in Marcion.

In the same way.
For Mark's agenda, Jesus could only be the Messiah if he had been introduced by a forerunner. As announced by Malachi and hoped for by the Jews.

I don't see any embarrassment here. Quite the contrary, in fact. That's exactly what Mark's aim is: to tick every possible box to convince that Jesus was the Messiah awaited by the Jews of the Second Temple.


Eruvin 43b:3
The Gemara answers: It is different there, as the verse stated: “Behold I will send you Elijah the prophet, before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the Lord; and he shall turn the heart of the fathers to the children, and the heart of the children to their fathers” (Malachi 3:23–24).
This verse teaches that Elijah will arrive the day before the coming of the Messiah. Since Elijah did not come the previous day, the Messiah will not come today, and therefore he may drink.

Shabbat 118a:7
Rabbi Shimon ben Pazi said that Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said in the name of bar Kappara: Anyone who fulfills the obligation to eat three meals on Shabbat is rescued from three punishments: From the pangs of the Messiah, i.e., the suffering that precedes the advent of Messiah, and from the judgment of Gehenna, and from the war of Gog and Magog. The Gemara derives that one is rescued from the pangs of Messiah by means of a verbal analogy. It is written here, with regard to Shabbat, day: “Eat it today” (Exodus 16:25).
And it is written there, with regard to Messiah, day:
“Behold, I am sending you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and awesome day of God” (Malachi 3:23).
The Gemara derives that one is rescued from the judgment of Gehenna by means of a verbal analogy. It is written here, with regard to Shabbat, day, as cited above. And it is written there, day: “That day will be a day of wrath, a day of trouble and distress, a day of destruction and desolation, a day of darkness and blackness, a day of cloud and thick fog” (Zephaniah 1:15), which is interpreted as referring to the punishment of Gehenna. The Gemara derives that one is rescued from the war of Gog and Magog by means of a verbal analogy. It is written here, with regard to Shabbat, day. And it is written there, with regard to the War of Gog and Magog, day: “And it shall be on that day, on the day that Gog arrives on the land of Israel” (Ezekiel 38:18).

Midrash Mishlei 19:3
... R’ Huna said: the Messiah is called by seven names, and they are – magnified, Our Righteousness, Shoot, Consoler, David, Shiloh, and Eliyahu. Magnified from where? As it says, “May his name be forever; before the sun, his name will be magnified…” (Tehillim 72:17) Our Righteousness from where? As it says, “…and this is his name that he shall be called, The Lord is our righteousness.” (Yirmiyahu 23:6) Shoot from where? As it says, “…Behold a man whose name is the Shoot…” (Zechariah 6:12) Consoler from where? As it says, “For the Lord shall console Zion…” (Yeshayahu 51:3) David from where? As it says, “…and He performs kindness to His anointed; to David and to his seed forever.” (Tehillim 18:51) Shiloh from where? As it says, “…until Shiloh comes, and to him will be a gathering of peoples.” (Bereshit 49:10) Eliyahu from where?
As it says, “Lo, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and awesome day of the Lord…” (Malachi 3:23)

Ok, no embarrassment at all, ok. And how do you answer to this final objection?

Giuseppe wrote: ↑Sat Jun 10, 2023 3:55 am Ok, no embarrassment at all, ok. And how do you answer to this final objection?

It's not John's identity that concerns Mark, but his assimilation to Elijah.

Sinouhe wrote: ↑Sat Jun 10, 2023 3:58 am

Giuseppe wrote: ↑Sat Jun 10, 2023 3:55 am Ok, no embarrassment at all, ok. And how do you answer to this final objection?

It's not John's identity that concerns Mark, but his assimilation to Elijah.

By doing so, Mark has made deliberately blunt the entry of John. This is not a coincidence for me (it betrayes the marcionite influence on Mark) while for you and Peter Kirby and Paul the Uncertain it is a mere coincidence.

Is it just a coincidence that John is introduced before Jesus when Mark writes that the Jews expected Elijah to return before the coming of the Messiah ?
And that this is confirmed in the scriptures and by the rabbis ?
What a coincidence.

Sinouhe wrote: ↑Sat Jun 10, 2023 4:05 am Is it just a coincidence that John is introduced before Jesus when Mark writes that the Jews expected Elijah to return before the coming of the Messiah ?
And that this is confirmed in the scriptures and by the rabbis ?
What a coincidence.

It is a coincidence, under Markan priority, that Peter is introduced as a fisher, Pilate as a ruler, Herod as a king, Matthew as a publican, Zebedee as a blind, while John the Baptist as... ...as Elijah and only Elijah. Which means: John is never really introduced in human terms, by only a term that captures his identity.

Note that in Marcion John the Baptist is defined "a prophet" or "one more than a prophet": that is what I mean for: a term that defines in human terms a person.

In Mark not even that.

Giuseppe wrote: ↑Sat Jun 10, 2023 4:17 am

Sinouhe wrote: ↑Sat Jun 10, 2023 4:05 am Is it just a coincidence that John is introduced before Jesus when Mark writes that the Jews expected Elijah to return before the coming of the Messiah ?
And that this is confirmed in the scriptures and by the rabbis ?
What a coincidence.

It is a coincidence, under Markan priority, that Peter is introduced as a fisher, Pilate as a ruler, Herod as a king, Matthew as a publican, Zebedee as a blind, while John the Baptist as... ...as Elijah and only Elijah. Which means: John is never really introduced in human terms, by only a term that captures his identity.

Correct me if I'm wrong but Pilate is not introduced in Mark before Mark 15. And nothing is told about his specific status.

There are several reasons for this, not least the fact that he was already well known to the readers he was addressing.

The same can be said of John, even though he is better introduced in the story than Pilate:

• Mark explains that he was a man who baptized crowds.

• Mark subtly associates him with Elijah.

In addition, Mark 11:32 shows how the Jews regarded John as a prophet

This may also be explained by the fact that Mark's target readers certainly knew this man. And if they didn't, the important thing for Mark was to use him as a propaganda tool to demonstrate that Jesus was the Messiah expected by the Jews.

Marcion, who in my opinion is much later than Mark, presents John under the attribute of Prophet:

- Certainly because readers had no idea who this man was.

- And certainly also because Marcion's readers were unaware of the Jewish tradition linking Elijah to the Messiah.

Unlike the readers Mark was targeting.

Giuseppe wrote: ↑Sat Jun 10, 2023 3:32 am I don't question the delay of the principal hero of the story (you are right on that). What I am considering as an anomaly, under the Markan priority, is the blunt entry of John the Baptist, ex abrupto.

Are you, or Sinouhe, or Peter, able to explain it?

Well, if you and I are in agreement that it's OK to delay the entry of Jesus for dramatic effect, then somebody has to have been onstage before him. Why not John the Baptist? He's the Ned Stark of the Gospel of Mark: he does his role, is never seen alive again, but his absence hangs over the action for the rest of the show.

You're almost surprised that he isn't the guy the women meet in the vacant tomb (how did Mark miss that one?).