Agnostic.com

9 2

Was Jesus made Christian when John the Baptist baptised him?

BCCPT2001 3 Dec 28
Share

Enjoy being online again!

Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.

Create your free account

9 comments

Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.

0

The NT would have us believe this yes,but it was Paul who came up with the Christ cult much later.So this Christian baptism is retrospective.

The baptism scene in the NT is used as a link the back to the OT. So John acts as a bridge between the two testaments.The Bible is put together deliberately in a particular order to make it look like Jesus' arrival was intended from the beginning of time.
In the Christian Bible the order of the OT scriptures is different to that of the Jewish Torah, for good reasons. The Christian Bible finishes with Malachi which ends with a prophesy of a coming of a chosen messenger. John the Baptist serves as the continuation of the prophesy in the NT,announcing Jesus as gods chosen son.
In this way Christianity way hijacked the Jewish god and his covenant with the Jews ,replacing it with a general one for all mankind

1

The bible is a work of fiction.

1

Most credible historians say he did exist but certainly not as the religionist depict him. I have a degree in European (read religion) History while in Europe. I spent time going all over Europe to study the places where events actually happened. This included time in Rome. The main instructor was an Irish atheist who spoke several languages, taught Greek and Latin at UCLA and lived/worked in Rome at one of the catacombs. The famous historian/author John Dominic Crossan wrote extensively about him in his books. Many Roman reliefs depict a person leading a group of men who most feel represent Jesus.

While in the military I was stationed in Turkey and the base was located where a famous philosopher, Diogenes of Sinop lived. Diogenes is known as the father of cynic philosophy which dictates to know real life one must live in a barrel with the dogs. It is assumed that John the Baptist, Francis of Assisi and even Jesus were followers of this philosophy. Crossan point out in one of his books that the clothing worn by this leader indicated a certain following. Like gangs today people had symbols, colors or style of clothing to represent their beliefs.

0

If jesus ever existed, even as a schizo with followers, the word, "xianity" didn't exist until quite some time later, so no. The bible does not claim any such thing, so why are you?

I didn't. I asked a question.

@BCCPT2001 Actually, by posing your question as a statement of a factual happening, and then soliciting comment on it as if it were a real happening, on an atheist website, i think my question about your question is quite valid.

0

I don't know I wasn't there

0

In Catholic school they taught that Mary was the first Christian due to her response to the Annunciation, but Jesus remained a Jew. If you're the son of Christian God I think you'd probably be exempt as a believer from your own religion, but hey, a lot of this doesn't make sense. Just my $0.02.

Cwen Level 4 Dec 29, 2017
0

Jesus was meta before meta was cool.

3

In fact, Jesus was an apostle of John. The Gospels try to reconcile Jesus and John's relationship, but if you pay close attention, Jesus was John's disciple, and it was his connection with John that gave him credibility with the Galileans, and later Judeans. Gospel writers tried to turn that around in their attempt to deify Jesus, but a careful romp through the gospels shows that it was John who gave Jesus his prestige.

Some historians agree with that. But after he saw what happened to John he changed his tactics.

0

Curiously, some atheist writers have pointed out that, taking this story at face value, if true then John was a higher figure than Jesus because he, John, baptised Jesus. How could a man be "higher" than the Son Of God? Of course I consider the whole story of Jesus to be crock of..anyway.

This is one of the reasons I believe that both Jesus and John the Baptist were historical figures. Such an embarrassing incident event as Jesus coming to John for baptism didn't fit in with the narrative of Jesus as God or with the narrative of Jesus as specially appointed by God, and I doubt it would have been included in the gospels had the writers not be forced to by the fact that the incident was well known among his contemporaries. To me, this says that Jesus was one of John's followers prior to starting his own ministry.

It's very interesting how one of the Gospels desperately tries to write John 'The Baptist out of the narrative. Yet even today there's a small group of people in the Middle East who regard John "The Baptist" in higher regard than Jesus (Joshua)

@WTSharpe Yes, I have read also read this speculation that Jesus was a disciple of John's and this had to be subsequently downplayed. Whether one considers this history or mythology, or a combination of the two, it is interesting. Dr. Richard Carrier (Mythicist) has emphasized early Christians' indifference to historical fact. Whether one agree with his mythicist view of Jesus or not, I think this point is beyond dispute.

@atheist Yes, what evidence indeed? Good question. Certainly no contemporaneous sources that I'm aware of. To me its like arguing over who was worse - The Joker or The Riddler at Gotham.

@MrBrown it is true that I do not presume the Bible to be fiction, but neither do I presume it is non-fiction. Much of it is obviously not based in fact, but that doesn't mean that everything the various writers wrote about was fictional. The attempt to determine how much is factual and how much is folklore has not been completely fruitless.

@atheist I know of no extra-Biblical evidence referring to a flesh and blood Jesus. A much-disputed passage in Josephus is often pointed to as proof, but I am personally convinced that passage is a forgery. Nonetheless I believe such a man existed. I don't believe the claims of divinity, and I feel much of his biography was invented by his later biographers, but I believe Jesus the man existed just as I believe Joseph Smith and Mohammed were real, flesh and blood human beings. Paul, the first Christian to leave any kind of written reword behind, never met Jesus (unless you include his visions, which I don't), but he does record meetings with some of the twelve who were among Jesus's most loyal followers. Moreover, the contentious nature of some of those meetings give them the ring of truth. These don't sound like incidents that Paul made up simply to enhance his stature among the faithful. A citizen of Nazareth? Probably so. The very ordinariness of the place makes it seem plausible. What glory does anyone add to their resume by claiming to be from the sticks? Born in Bethlehem? Very doubtful. Resume padding by the authors of Luke and Matthew (and perhaps Q) to make it appear as if his birth was in accordance with prophecy.

"Record", not "reword". Damned Swype! ????

@WTSharpe There is reference in Roman historian Tacitus, in notes, to events suggesting the crucifixion of Jesus, but again it is strongly suspected it was a later addition. You are right, there are no generally accepted and validated accounts in non biblical sources about the life and death of Jesus, or even the early so-called Jesus cult. And this, the so called greatest story ever told, during such a important period of Roman history, the Julian-Claudian emperors, of which there are a surprisingly high number of primary sources, both histories and documents, and yet nothing about these apparently amazing events. Not one. As more than one Christian has said to me, "It doesn't matter who the real Jesus was, and everything we say about Jesus is true." My mouth just drops.

Write Comment
You can include a link to this post in your posts and comments by including the text q:11224
Agnostic does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.