tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5759844.post3553806460597047765..comments2024-03-21T14:59:20.729-04:00Comments on NT Blog: Historical Jesus Missing Pieces IV: Placing the BaptsmMark Goodacrehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05115370166754797529noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5759844.post-52089253751782910042009-06-11T21:41:32.909-04:002009-06-11T21:41:32.909-04:00Thanks, Jayman. Good point, though I think that L...Thanks, Jayman. Good point, though I think that Luke was dependent on Mark and based his structure of Jesus' ministry on the one found in Mark.Mark Goodacrehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05115370166754797529noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5759844.post-48314876779680530892009-06-11T18:54:42.078-04:002009-06-11T18:54:42.078-04:00Mr. Goodacre, what about the chronological stateme...Mr. Goodacre, what about the chronological statements in Luke 3:1 that are not mentioned in Mark? Luke could hardly be following Mark on that count. At the very least, scholars who posit Jesus' baptism at the beginning of his public ministry are not merely following the order of Mark's narrative.Jaymanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06413844619464733681noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5759844.post-3379696474764988892009-06-11T09:42:13.159-04:002009-06-11T09:42:13.159-04:00On a tangential note:
Your mention of Jesus' ...On a tangential note:<br /><br />Your mention of Jesus' post-baptism testing in the wilderness makes me wonder if this is an adoptionist passage. An incarnate yet preexistent Son of God would hardly need to prove himself while a newly adopted, yet thoroughly human, Messiah might need to strut his stuff or even experience a cathartic ritual in preparation for his role.<br /><br />Paid Advertisement:<br />Join Dilettantes Anonymous Today! See local listings for a DA meeting near you.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5759844.post-33034645748336207002009-06-11T09:38:54.792-04:002009-06-11T09:38:54.792-04:00Scott: interesting thoughts. I wouldn't be in...Scott: interesting thoughts. I wouldn't be inclined to go so far but I think you are right about the prominence of John the Baptist as a famous figure. You see it not only in Josephus but also in the apologetic interests of the evangelists, e.g. in Luke's account of those who only knew the baptism of John in Acts. My guess is that Jesus was himself influenced by John and went to him for baptism, and this event is brilliantly spun by Mark to create an exchange and succession. Cf. my earlier thoughts about the question of "influence" in the first post in this series.Mark Goodacrehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05115370166754797529noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5759844.post-45722651895840309672009-06-11T09:34:21.354-04:002009-06-11T09:34:21.354-04:00I have been wondering of late whether the connecti...I have been wondering of late whether the connection between John and Jesus was manufactured.<br />Given John the Baptist's mention by Josephus in the Antiquities and his bare (if authentic) reference to the Christian movement, one would have to conclude that John was an influential and popular figure while the early Christians were obscure. The evangelists (or oral tradition as a whole, if you prefer) could hardly ignore John's importance. What was needed was some way of connecting Jesus to John's movement while at the same time distinguishing him from the former. Hence a baptism and exchange was imagined in order to legitimize Jesus ministry and, to put it crudely, ride John the Baptists coattails. This would retain your conjecture that Mark felt it necessary to cast John's (apocryphal) role as the Elijah figure. <br /><br />How's that for dilettantism?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5759844.post-15157980647416222382009-06-11T09:31:20.549-04:002009-06-11T09:31:20.549-04:00Thanks, Phil. Good thought.
Jayman: I think th...Thanks, Phil. Good thought. <br /><br />Jayman: I think that Luke is there assuming the Marcan narrative frame which he in any case enhances in the Gospel.Mark Goodacrehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05115370166754797529noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5759844.post-46694973989436010492009-06-10T18:34:19.921-04:002009-06-10T18:34:19.921-04:00What do you make of Acts 1:22; 10:37; and 13:24-25...What do you make of Acts 1:22; 10:37; and 13:24-25?Jaymanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06413844619464733681noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5759844.post-45881095327769177312009-06-10T17:45:40.619-04:002009-06-10T17:45:40.619-04:00Hello Mark,
Your suggestion here would have signi...Hello Mark,<br /><br />Your suggestion here would have significant implications for those who argue for a non-apocalyptic Jesus. For example, Crossan, too, assumes that the baptism by John the Baptist took place early, early enough to suggest that Jesus changed his mind and no longer shared John's apocalyptic perspective. The non-apocalyptic Jesus may fall apart for other reasons, but it would certainly fall apart if John is apocalyptic and if Jesus was baptized part way through his own teaching and healing activity.<br /><br />Just a thought.<br /><br />PhilPhil H.https://www.blogger.com/profile/07980469495101772888noreply@blogger.com