Is 'Serious Scholarship' Biased in Favor of Historicity?

[outhouse]

Do you know the simple reasons(s) that they give?

I already stated they use the different criterions that should be used with caution. Different scholars attribute different levels to each

Im sure Josephus has a lot to do with the baptism. Crucifixion, multiple attestation.

[outhouse]

Dear Outhouse, there is no need to be frightened

.

[neilgodfrey]

Do you know the simple reasons(s) that they give?

I already stated they use the different criterions that should be used with caution. Different scholars attribute different levels to each

Im sure Josephus has a lot to do with the baptism. Crucifixion, multiple attestation.

They use different criteria for different things. We all know that. But that's not my question.

My question is this:

What criterion do they use to claim that the baptism of Jesus was historical? What particular exact criterion do they use to prove that one?

I have never read a single scholar saying they know Jesus was baptized because of Josephus's evidence and I bet you never have either.

Maybe asking you two simple questions at once has been overwhelming so let's just stick with this one question for now.

Or is it beyond your ability to admit you do not know the answer? No need to worry if you can't. I have already said I will tell you if you don't know.

[Tenorikuma]

As Steven Carr would put it, we know the baptism is historical because two of the Gospels don't mention it.

[Bernard Muller]

Considering:
a) Many Jews were baptized by John in these days, according to Josephus Antiquities.
b) Q has two passages showing Jesus was a great admirer of John (and even considered him far superior to anybody else, including Jesus himself: Lk 7:28a), which goes against the gospels putting Jesus far above John.
c) The two points below suggest the fact Jesus stayed around John for a long time, which "Mark" tried to hide:
1) Jesus left the desert for Galilee right after John got arrested (a coincidence! I do not think so) (Mk 1:14)
AND
2) after his baptism Jesus allegedly lived in some mythological desert, attended by angels and tempted by Satan (therefore very doubtful) (Mk 1:12-13)

I think there is a 90-100% probability Jesus was baptized by John the Baptist, as one guy among many others.

Cordially, Bernard

[Clive]

But one of the other gospels is obviously describing a historical event!

[9 At that time Jesus came from Nazareth in Galilee and was baptized by John in the Jordan. 10 Just as Jesus was coming up out of the water, he saw heaven being torn open and the Spirit descending on him like a dove. 11 And a voice came from heaven: “You are my Son, whom I love; with you I am well pleased.”

[MrMacSon]

But one of the other gospels is obviously describing a historical event!

Nah, parting of the waters would've made it historical.

[Clive]

[9 At that time Jesus came from Nazareth in Galilee and was baptized by John in the Jordan.

Just trying to work out this history remains after removing the myth stuff. OK, I dump the God speaking and dove bit.

What have I left?

First clause sounds like "once upon a time"

Is this "Jesus" one of these abbreviations?

"Nazareth" Where is that?

Galilee? Is that a place with theological meaning?

Jordan - now that one does!

Baptised....

[Clive]

Seek and ye shall find!

The miracle could also be seen as the antitype of Moses' first public miracle of changing water (the Nile river) into blood. This would establish a symbolic link between Moses as the first savior of the Jews through their escape from Egypt and Jesus as the spiritual savior of all people.[8]

Cana in Galilee.......

Wiki

[neilgodfrey]

(Promise not to tell outhouse this, but the one reason that is found in the scholarly books on the historical Jesus over and over is that no-one would make up the story of Jesus' baptism. Criterion of embarrassment. Full stop. That's it. Of course there are other historical Jesus scholars who demonstrate the invalidity of this argument but those arguments to my knowledge are consistently ignored, never addressed.)